Use of inactivated nonreplicating modified vaccinia virus ankara (mva) as monoimmunotherapy or in combination with immume checkpoint blocking agents for solid tumors

ABSTRACT

The present disclosure relates to infection-competent, but nonreplicative inactivated modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) and its use as immunotherapy, alone, or in combination with immune checkpoint blocking agents for the treatment of malignant solid tumors. Particular embodiments relate to inducing an immune response in a subject diagnosed with a solid malignant tumor.

RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No.15/553,222, filed Aug. 24, 2017, which is a U.S. National StageApplication of PCT/US2016/019663, filed Feb. 25, 2016, which claimspriority from U.S. Provisional Application No. 62/120,862, filed Feb.25, 2015, each of which are incorporated herein by reference in theirentireties.

Government Support

This invention was made with government support under A1073736 andA1095692 awarded by the National Institutes of Health. The governmenthas certain rights in the invention.

SEQUENCE LISTING

The instant application contains a Sequence Listing which has been filedelectronically in ASCII format and is hereby incorporated by referencein its entirety. Said ASCII copy, created on Mar. 28, 2019, is named115872-0707 SL.txt and is 1,823 bytes in size.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to the fields of oncology,virology and immunotherapy. More particularly, it concerns the use ofpoxviruses, specifically inactivated modified vaccinia Ankara virus(“inactivated-MVA”) which is infection-competent but nonreplicative andwhich has been further modified for example by heat or ultraviolet light(UV) irradiation. This inactivated MVA can be used as animmunotherapeutic agent for the treatment of cancer either asmonotherapy or as a combination therapy in combination with immunecheckpoint blockade therapies.

BACKGROUND Immune System and Cancer

Malignant tumors are inherently resistant to conventional therapies andpresent significant therapeutic challenges. Immunotherapy has become anevolving area of research and an additional option for the treatment ofcertain types of cancers. The immunotherapy approach rests on therationale that the immune system may be stimulated to identify tumorcells, and target them for destruction.

Numerous studies support the importance of the differential presence ofimmune system components in cancer progression [1]. Clinical datasuggest that high densities of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes are linkedto improved clinical outcome [2]. The correlation between a robustlymphocyte infiltration and patient survival has been reported invarious types of cancer, including melanoma, ovarian, head and neck,breast, urothelial, colorectal, lung, hepatocellular, gallbladder, andesophageal cancer [3]. Tumor immune infiltrates include macrophages,dendritic cells (DC), mast cells, natural killer (NK) cells, naïve andmemory lymphocytes, B cells and effector T cells (T lymphocytes),primarily responsible for the recognition of antigens expressed by tumorcells and subsequent destruction of the tumor cells by T cells.

Despite presentation of antigens by cancer cells and the presence ofimmune cells that could potentially react against tumor cells, in manycases the immune system does not get activated. Key to this phenomenonis the ability of tumors to protect themselves from immune response bycoercing cells of the immune system to inhibit other cells of the immunesystem. For example, CD4⁺ T cells possess the ability to differentiateinto T regulatory (Treg) cells, which have the ability to inhibitactivated T cells. Additionally, cancer cells can impair CDS⁺ T celleffector function, leading to the evasion of anti-tumor immune response.Finally, the local immunosuppressive nature of the tumormicroenvironment, along with immune editing, can lead to the escape ofcancer cell subpopulations that do not express the target antigens.This, finding a method to that would allow for the preservation and/orrestoration of anti-tumor activities of the immune system is ofparamount importance.

It has been established that type I IFN plays important roles in hostantitumor immunity [4]. IFNAR1-deficent mice are more susceptible todeveloping tumors after implantation of tumor cells. Spontaneoustumor-specific T cell priming is also defective in IFNAR1-deficient mice[5, 6]. More recent studies have shown that the cytosolic DNA-sensingpathway is important in the recognition of tumor-derived DNA by theinnate immune system. In turn, this leads to the development ofantitumor CD8⁺ T cell immunity [7]. This pathway also plays an importantrole in radiation-induced antitumor immunity [8].

Melanoma

Melanoma, one of the deadliest cancers, is the fastest growing cancer inthe US and worldwide. Its incidence has increased by 50% among youngCaucasian women since 1980, primarily due to excess sun exposure and theuse of tanning beds. According to the American Cancer Society,approximately 76,380 people in the US will be diagnosed with melanomaand 10,130 people (or one person per hour) are expected to die ofmelanoma in 2016. In most cases, advanced melanoma is resistant toconventional therapies, including chemotherapy and radiation. As aresult, people with metastatic melanoma have a very poor prognosis, witha life expectancy of only 6 to 10 months. The discovery that about 50%of melanomas have mutations in BRAF (a key tumor-promoting gene) openedthe door for targeted therapy in this disease. Early clinical trialswith BRAF inhibitors showed remarkable, but unfortunately notsustainable responses in patients with melanomas with BRAF mutations.Therefore, alternative treatment strategies for these patients, as wellas patients with melanoma without BRAF mutations, are urgently needed.

Human pathological data indicate that the presence of T-cell infiltrateswithin melanoma lesions correlates positively with longer patientsurvival [9]. The importance of the immune system in protection againstmelanoma is further supported by partial success of immunotherapies,such as the immune activators IFN-α2b and IL-2 [10] as well as theunprecedented clinical responses of patients with metastatic melanoma toimmune checkpoint blockade therapy, including anti-CTLA-4 andanti-PD-1/PD-L1 used either individually or in combination [11-17].However, many patients fail to respond to immune checkpoint blockadetherapy alone. The addition of virotherapy might overcome resistance toimmune checkpoint blockade, which is supported by animal tumor models[18].

Poxviruses

Poxviruses, such as engineered vaccinia viruses, are in the forefront asoncolytic therapy for metastatic cancers [19]. Vaccinia viruses arelarge DNA viruses, which have a rapid life cycle [20]. Poxviruses arewell suited as vectors to express multiple transgenes in cancer cellsand thus to enhance therapeutic efficacy [21]. Preclinical studies andclinical trials have demonstrated efficacy of using oncolytic vacciniaviruses and other poxviruses for treatment of advanced cancersrefractory to conventional therapy [22-24]. Poxvirus-based oncolytictherapy has the advantage of killing cancer cells through a combinationof cell lysis, apoptosis, and necrosis. It also triggers the innateimmune sensing pathway that facilitates the recruitment of immune cellsto the tumors and the development of anti-tumor adaptive immuneresponses. The current oncolytic vaccinia strains in clinical trials(JX-594, for example) use wild-type vaccinia with deletion of thymidinekinase to enhance tumor selectivity, and with expression of transgenessuch as granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) tostimulate immune responses [21]. Many studies have shown however thatwild-type vaccinia has immune suppressive effects on antigen presentingcells (APCs) [25-28] and thus adds to the immunosuppressive andimmunoevasive effects of the tumors themselves.

Poxviruses are extraordinarily adept at evading and antagonizingmultiple innate immune signaling pathways by encoding proteins thatinterdict the extracellular and intracellular components of thosepathways [29]. Modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) is an attenuatedvaccinia virus that was developed through serial passaging in chickenembryonic fibroblasts. MVA has a 31-kb deletion of the parental vacciniagenome and was used successfully as a vaccine during the WHO-sponsoredsmallpox eradication campaign [30-32]. MVA has been investigatedintensively as a vaccine vector against HIV, tuberculosis, malaria,influenza, and coronavirus, as well as cancers [33-38].

MVA has deletions or truncations of several intracellularimmunomodulatory genes including K1L, N1L, and A52R, which have beenimplicated in regulating innate immune responses [39-46]. On the otherhand, MVA retains the E3L gene encoding a bifunctional Z-DNA/dsRNAbinding protein, a key vaccinia virulence factor [47-55]. It has beenshown that MVA infection of human monocyte-derived dendritic cellscauses DC activation [56]. Waibler et al. [57] reported that MVAinfection of murine Flt3L-DC triggered a TLR-independent type I IFNresponse. In addition, MVA infection of human macrophages triggers typeI IFN and pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines via aTLR2/TLR6/MyD88 and MDAS/MAVS-dependent pathways [58].

The sensing of DNA in the cytosol triggers a cascade of events leadingto the production of type I IFN and cytokines as well as cellular stressresponses. STING (stimulator of IFN genes) was identified as animportant adaptor for the cytosolic DNA-sensing pathway [59-61]. Thenature of the DNA sensors remained elusive until the discovery of cyclicGMP-AMP synthase (cGAS) as the critical DNA sensor, and its productcyclic GMP-AMP, which contains an unanticipated 2′,5′ linkage at the GpAstep and standard 3′,5′ linkage at the ApG step [62-68] Subsequentresearch confirmed STING as the key adaptor activated by cGAMP, therebymediating the cascade of downstream events involving kinases andtranscription factors that lead to the interferon response [66, 68, 69].We reported that MVA infection of murine conventional dendritic cellsinduces type I IFN via a cytosolic DNA-sensing pathway mediated bycytosolic DNA sensor cGAS, its adaptor STING, and transcription factorsIRF3 and IRF7. By contrast, wild-type vaccinia virus fails to activatethis pathway. Intravenous inoculation of MVA via tail-vein injectioninduced type I IFN secretion in WT mice, which was diminished in STINGor IRF3-deficient mice [70]. Furthermore, we showed that vacciniavirulence factors E3 and N1 play inhibitory roles in the cytosolicDNA-sensing pathway [70].

SUMMARY OF THE DISCLOSURE

In one aspect, the present disclosure provides a method for treating asubject afflicted with one or more solid malignant tumors, the methodcomprising delivering to cells of the tumor inactivated modifiedvaccinia Ankara (inactivated MVA) and thereby treating the tumor.

In another aspect, a method is provided for treating a solid malignanttumor in a subject comprising delivering to tumor cells of the subjectan amount of inactivated-MVA effective to induce the immune system ofthe subject to mount an immune response against the tumor.

In yet another aspect, the disclosure provides a method for treating amalignant tumor in a subject, the method comprising a combination ofdelivering to tumor cells of the subject inactivated-MVA in an amounteffective to induce the immune system of the subject to mount an immuneresponse against the tumor and conjointly administering to the subject asecond amount of an immune checkpoint blocking agent effective to blockan immune checkpoint expressed by the tumor, thereby treating the tumor.As used herein, “delivering” means “administering;” the former is mostlyused in connection with inactivated MVA, the latter in connection withimmune checkpoint blocking agents.

It will be understood that unless stated explicitly to the contrary, theembodiments described below shall pertain to each of the foregoingaspects and that features of further or more specific embodiments may bepresented individually within a particular aspect or one or more of themmay be combined.

In some embodiments, the amount of inactivated MVA is effective toaccomplish one or more of the following:

-   -   a. induce the immune system of the subject to mount an immune        response against the tumor;    -   b. reduce the size of the tumor;    -   c. eradicate the tumor;    -   d. inhibit growth of the tumor;    -   e. inhibit metastasis of the tumor; and    -   f. reduce or eradicate metastatic tumor.

In some embodiments, the treated tumor includes tumor located at thesite of inactivated MVA delivery, or tumor located both at said site andelsewhere in the body of the subject. In other words, the effect of MVAdelivery is systemic even though the inactivated MVA may be delivered toonly one or only a plurality of solid tumors of the subject.

In more specific embodiments, the immune response comprises on or moreof the following:

-   -   a. increase in cytotoxic CD8⁺ T cells within the tumor and/or in        tumor-draining lymph nodes;    -   b. induction of maturation of dendritic cells infiltrating said        tumor through induction of type I IFN;    -   c. induction of activated CD4⁺ effector T cells in the subject        recognizing tumor cells within the tumors or systemically;    -   d. reduction in immune suppressive (regulatory) CD4⁺ T cells        within the tumor; and    -   e. induction of cells of the tumor to express MEW Class I on        their surface and to produce one or more of Type I IFN and other        inflammatory cytokines and chemokines.

In some embodiments, the tumor is primary or metastatic melanoma orprimary or metastatic colon carcinoma.

In some embodiments, the subject is a human.

In some embodiments, the delivery of the inactivated MVA is repeated inspaced apart time intervals; in more specific embodiments, the repeateddelivery continues for several weeks, months or years or indefinitely aslong as benefits persist or a maximum tolerated dose is reached; infurther embodiments, the delivery of inactivated MVA is repeated with afrequency within the range from once per month to two times per week; insome more specific embodiments, the delivery is repeated once weekly.

In some embodiments, delivery of the inactivated MVA is by parenteralroute; in more specific embodiments by intratumor injection orintravenous injection.

In some embodiments, the inactivated-MVA is delivered at a dosage peradministration within the range of about 10⁵-10¹⁰ plaque-forming units(pfu); in more specific embodiments, it is delivered at a dosage peradministration within the range of about 10⁶ to about 10⁹ plaque-formingunits (pfu).

In some embodiments, the inactivated MVA is UV-inactivated MVA; in otherembodiments, it is heat-inactivated MVA; in yet other embodiments, acombination of heat- and UV-inactivated MVA.

In some embodiments, the induction and activation of effector T cells isaccompanied by a reduction of regulatory CD4⁺ cells in said tumor; insome embodiments, the inactivated-MVA induces maturation of dendriticcells infiltrating said tumor through induction of type I IFN; in someembodiments, the inactivated MVA induces the expression of MEW Class Iand the induction of one or more of type I interferon and otherinflammatory cytokines and chemokines in infected tumor cells.

In some embodiments, the induced immune response effects or contributesto one or more of the following: reduction of the size of the tumor,eradication of the tumor, inhibition of tumor or metastatic growth.Again, the tumor is not confined to the tumor injected with inactivatedMVA.

Specific embodiments within the third aspect mentioned above include theforegoing and additional ones as follows:

In some embodiments, the delivery of the inactivated MVA is byintratumoral injection and the administration of the immune checkpointblocking agents by intravenous route; in other embodiments, both thedelivery and the administration are by intravenous route; in yet otherembodiments, both the delivery and the administration are byintratumoral injection. In some embodiments, the immune checkpointblocking agent is selected from the group consisting of anti-PD-1inhibitors, PD-L1, inhibitors and CTLA4 inhibitors, which in specificembodiments are antibodies

In some embodiments, the inactivated MVA is delivered and the immunecheckpoint blocking agents administered each according to its ownadministration schedule of spaced apart intervals. In some embodiments,the delivery and administration occur in parallel during the sameoverall period of time.

In some embodiments, a first dose of the inactivated MVA is deliveredfirst and after a lapse of time, for example a week, a first dose of theimmune checkpoint blocking agent is administered. In some embodiments,one or both of the inactivated MVA and the immune checkpoint blockingagent are respectively delivered and administered during a period oftime of several weeks, months or years, or indefinitely as long asbenefits persist and a maximum tolerated dose is not reached.

In some embodiments, the immune checkpoint blocking agent and theinactivated MVA are administered simultaneously; in some embodiments,they are administered in the same composition; in some embodiments, theyare both delivered intratumorally. In some embodiments, simultaneousdelivery permits a lower dose of the immune check point blocking agentto be employed and the combined effect of the two active agents can besynergistic.

Any feature or combination of features of any embodiment or chosen amongmultiple embodiments that is or are disclosed may be excluded.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIGS. 1A-1C are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat Heat-MVA induces higher levels of type I IFN production in murinecDCs than MVA. FIG. 1A are bar graphs of relative IFNA4 and IFNB mRNAexpression levels compared to no virus control in cDCs (GM-CSF-culturedbone marrow derived DCs) infected with MVA at a MOI of 10 or with anequivalent amount of Heat-MVA. Data are means±SEM (n=3). Arepresentative experiment is shown, repeated at least twice. FIG. 1B aregraphs of the concentrations of secreted IFN-α and IFN-β in the mediumover time following MVA or Heat-MVA infection of cDCs (***, p<0.001).Data are means±SEM (n=3). A representative experiment is shown, repeatedat least twice. FIG. 1C is a scanned image of a Western Blot showingprotein levels of p25 of vaccinia E3, p-IRF-3, and β-actin (as a loadingcontrol). “hpi”, hours post infection. “M”, mock infection control.

FIGS. 2A-G are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat Heat-MVA induced type I IFN production is dependent on thecytosolic DNA-sensing pathway mediated by cGAS and STING. FIG. 2A is abar graph of IFNA4 and IFNB relative mRNA expression compared with novirus control in cDCs generated from cGAS^(+/+) and cGAS^(−/−) mice andinfected with Heat-MVA (***, p<0.001). Data are means±SEM (n=3). Arepresentative experiment is shown, repeated twice. FIG. 2B is a bargraph of the concentrations of secreted IFN-α and IFN-β in the medium ofcDCs generated from cGAS^(+/+) and cGAS^(−/−) mice and infected withHeat-MVA (***, p<0.001). Data are means±SEM (n=3). A representativeexperiment is shown, repeated twice. FIG. 2C is a bar graph of IFNA4 andIFNB relative mRNA expression compared with no virus control in cDCsgenerated from STING^(+/+) and STING^(Gt/Gt) mice and infected withHeat-MVA (***, p<0.001). Data are means±SEM (n=3). A representativeexperiment is shown, repeated at least twice. FIG. 2D is a bar graph ofthe concentrations of secreted IFN-α and IFN-β in the medium of cDCsgenerated from STING^(+/+) and STING^(Gt/Gt) mice and infected withHeat-MVA (***, p<0.001). Data are means±SEM (n=3). A representativeexperiment is shown, repeated at least twice. FIG. 2E is a scanned imageof a Western Blot showing protein levels of p-IRF3 and β-actin incGAS^(+/+) and cGAS^(−/−) cDCs following Heat-MVA infection. “hpi”,hours post infection. “M”, mock infection control. FIG. 2F is a scannedimage of a Western Blot showing protein levels of p-IRF3 and β-actin inSTING^(+/+) and STING^(GtGt) cDCs following Heat-MVA infection. “hpi”,hours post infection. “M”, mock infection control. FIG. 2G is a seriesof graphs showing the expression of surface markers MHCI (MHC class I),CD40, CD86, and CD80 in Heat-MVA infected cDCs generated fromSTING^(GtGt) and WT mice. A representative experiment is shown, repeatedat least twice.

FIGS. 3A-D are a series of graphs showing that Heat-MVA induced type IIFN production is dependent on transcription factors IRF3, IRF7, andIFNAR1. FIG. 3A is a graph depicting fold induction of IFNA4 and IFNBmRNA expression following Heat-MVA infection of cDCs generated from WT,IRF3^(−/−), IRF5^(−/−), and IRF7^(−/−) mice. Data are means±SEM (n=3). Arepresentative experiment is shown, repeated twice. FIG. 3B is a graphdepicting the concentrations of secreted IFN-α and IFN-β in the mediumof heat-MVA-infected cDCs generated from WT, IRF3^(−/−), IRF5^(−/−), andIRF7^(−/−) mice Data are means±SEM (n=3). A representative experiment isshown, repeated twice. FIG. 3C is a bar graph showing fold induction ofIFNA4 and IFNB mRNA following Heat-MVA infection of cDCs generated fromIFNAR^(+/+) and IFNR^(−/−) mice Data are means±SEM (n=3). Arepresentative experiment is shown, repeated twice. FIG. 3D is a bargraph showing the concentrations of secreted IFN-α and IFN-β in themedium of heat-MVA-infected cDCs generated from IFNAR^(+/+) andIFNR^(−/−) mice. Data are means±SEM (n=3). A representative experimentis shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 4A-C are a series of scatterplots showing that Heat-MVA induceshigher levels of type I IFN than MVA in vivo and it does so in aSTING/IRF3/IRF7-dependent manner. FIG. 4A is a scatterplot of theconcentrations of the secreted IFN-α and IFN-β in the serum from WT miceinoculated with MVA (2×10⁷ pfu) or an equivalent amount of Heat-MVA viatail vein injections. Serum was collected at 6 h post inoculation (***,p<0.001; n=5). A representative experiment is shown, repeated twice.FIG. 4B is a scatterplot of the concentrations of the secreted IFN-α andIFN-β in the serum from IFNAR^(+/+) or IFNR^(−/−) mice inoculated withHeat-MVA (**, p<0.01; ***, p<0.001; n=5). A representative experiment isshown, repeated twice. FIG. 4C is a scatterplot of the concentrations ofthe secreted IFN-α and IFN-β in the serum from WT, IRF3^(−/−),IRF7^(−/−), or STING^(Gt/Gt) mice inoculated with Heat-MVA (n=5). Arepresentative experiment is shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 5A-D are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat Heat-MVA infection of B16-F10 melanoma cells induces the productionof type I IFN and proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines. FIG. 5A is aseries of bar graphs showing the fold induction of mRNA levels of IFNA4,IFNB, CCL5, and IL6 following Heat-MVA or MVA infection of B16-F10melanoma cells. Data are means±SEM (n=3). A representative experiment isshown, repeated twice. FIG. 5B is a series of bar graphs showing theconcentrations of secreted IFN-α and IFN-β, CCL5, and IL-6 in the mediumof B16-F10 melanoma cells following Heat-MVA or MVA infection. Data aremeans±SEM (n=3). A representative experiment is shown, repeated twice.FIG. 5C is a scanned image of a Western Blot showing p-IRF, IRF, andGAPDH protein levels (as a loading control) in B16-F10 cells infectedwith Heat-MVA or MVA. “hpi”, hours post infection. FIG. 5D is a graph ofWWI expression in B16-F10 cells infected with no virus control, MVA, orHeat-MVA. A representative experiment is shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 6A-C are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat MVA treated with heat-inactivation at 55° C. for 1 h inducedhighest levels of IFN secretion from cDCs. FIGS. 6A, 6B, and 6C are bargraphs of the concentrations respectively of secreted IFN-α (A) andIFN-β (B) and IL-6 (C) in the medium of cDCs infected with MVAheat-treated at different temperatures for 1 hour. Data are means±SEM(n=3). A representative experiment is shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 7A-D are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat Heat-MVA injection leads to tumor eradication and systemicanti-tumoral immunity. FIG. 7A is a plot of tumor volume against time(days) after PBS (open circles; n=5) or Heat-MVA (filled circles; n=10)injection. A representative experiment is shown, repeated at least fivetimes. FIG. 7B is a Kaplan-Meier survival curve of tumor-bearing miceinjected with PBS (open circles; n=5) or Heat-MVA (filled circles; n=10)(****, p<0.0001). A representative experiment is shown, repeated atleast five times. FIG. 7C is a Kaplan-Meier survival curve of naïve mice(open circles; n=5) and Heat-MVA-treated mice (filled circles; n=10)re-challenged at the contralateral side with a lethal dose of B16-F10melanoma cells (1×10⁶ cells). A representative experiment is shown,repeated at least five times. FIG. 7D is a scatterplot of the number oftumor foci on the surface of lungs collected at 3 weeks from eithernaïve mice (open circles; n=9) or Heat-MVA-treated mice (filled circles;n=10) after intravenous delivery of 1×10⁶ cells (****, p<0.0001). Arepresentative experiment is shown, repeated at least twice.

FIGS. 8A-L are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA leads to immunological changesin the tumor microenvironment. FIG. 8A is the flow cytometric analysisof CD3⁺CD45⁺ T cells. FIGS. 8B-C are scatterplots of flow cytometricanalysis of CD8⁺ cells expressing Granzyme (8B) or Ki-67 (8C). FIGS.8D-F are scatterplots of flow cytometric analysis of CD4⁺ cellsexpressing FoxP3 (8D), Granzyme B (8E), or Ki-67 (8F). FIGS. 8G-L arescatterplots of percentages of CD45⁺CD3⁺ (8G), CD8⁺Granzyme B⁺ (8H),CD8⁺Ki-67⁺ (8I), CD4⁺Foxp3⁺ (8J), CD4⁺Granzyme B⁺ (8K), and CD4⁺Ki67⁺(8L) cells within tumors of mice treated with PBS (n=5) or Heat-MVA(n=5; ***, p<0.001; ****, p<0.0001). A representative experiment isshown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 9A-H are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat Heat-MVA induces immunological changes in the tumor draining lymphnodes (TDLNs). FIGS. 9A-D are scatterplots of flow cytometric analysisof Granzyme B⁺CD8⁺ (9A), Granzyme B⁺CD4⁺ (9B), Ki-67⁺CD8⁺ (9C), andKi67⁺CD4⁺ (9D) cells isolated from TDLNs of PBS (n=5) or Heat-MVA (n=5)treated mice. FIGS. 9E-H are graphs depicting percentages of GranzymeB⁺CD8⁺ (9E), Ki67⁺CD8⁺ (9F), Granzyme B⁺CD4⁺ (9G), and Ki67⁺CD4⁺ (9H)cells in TDLNs (n=5; ***, p<0.001; ****, p<0.0001). A representativeexperiment is shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 10A-B are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat Heat-MVA is less effective in eradicating B16-F10 melanomas inSTING-deficient mice or Batf3-deficient mice compared with wild-typecontrols. FIG. 10A is a graph of tumor volume v. time (days) followingPBS or Heat-MVA injection in tumor-bearing WT, STING^(Gt/Gt), andBatf3^(−/−) mice. FIG. 10B is a Kaplan-Meier survival curve oftumor-bearing WT, STING^(Gt/Gt), and Batf3^(−/−) mice treated with PBSor Heat-MVA (n ranges from 5-8 for different groups; **, p<0.01; ****,p<0.0001). A representative experiment is shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 11A-I are a series of graphical representations of data showingHeat-MVA-induced antitumor effects is largely mediated by CD8⁺ T cellsand CD4⁺ T cells contribute the development of systemic immunity againsttumor re-challenge. FIG. 11A is a schematic diagram of intratumoralinjection of Heat-MVA in the presence or absence of depleting antibodiesfor CD4⁺, CD8⁺, and NK cells in a unilateral B16-F10 melanomaimplantation model. FIG. 11B is a Kaplan-Meier survival curve of micetreated with either PBS or Heat-MVA in the presence of isotype control,CD4⁺, CD8⁺, and NK cells-depleting antibodies (n=10; *, p<0.05; **,p<0.01; ****, p<0.0001). FIG. 11C-G are graphs of tumor volumes plottedagainst days after various treatment regimens including PBS (11C),Heat-MVA+isotype control (11D), Heat-MVA+anti-CD8 (11E),Heat-MVA+anti-CD4 (11F), and Heat-MVA+anti-NK (11G). FIG. 11H is aschematic diagram of tumor re-challenge with intradermal implantation ofa lethal dose of 1×10⁶ B16-F10 cells at the left flank in naïve mice andsurvived mice treated with Heat-MVA for the original tumor implanted atthe right flank in the presence or absence of CD4⁺ and NK celldepletion. FIG. 11I is a Kaplan-Meier survival curve of naïve mice(closed circles, n=6), Heat-MVA-treated mice (filled circles, n=10),Heat-MVA-treated mice with NK depletion (filled squares, n=6), andHeat-MVA-treated mice with CD4⁺ T cell depletion (filled triangles,n=6), re-challenged at the contralateral side with a lethal dose ofB16-F10 melanoma cell re-challenge (*, p<0.05; **, p<0.01; ****,p<0.0001). A representative experiment is shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 12A-B are a series of graphical representations of data showingintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA-induced anti-melanoma antibodyresponse that is dependent on STING and Batf3. FIG. 12A is a scatterplotof anti-melanoma antibody concentrations (determined by ELISA) in theserum of STING^(Gt/Gt), Batf3^(−/−), and age-matched WT mice treatedwith Heat-MVA or PBS (NT, no serum treatment control). FIG. 12B is ascatterplot of anti-vaccinia viral antibody concentrations (determinedby ELISA) in the serum of STING^(Gt/Gt), Batf3^(−/−), and age-matched WTmice treated with Heat-MVA or PBS (NT, no serum treatment control). Arepresentative experiment is shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 13A-D are graphs of tumor volume plotted against time (days) aftervarious treatment regimens including intratumoral injection of PBS plusintraperitoneal delivery of isotype antibody control (13A, n=5),intratumoral injection of PBS plus intraperitoneal delivery ofanti-CTLA-4 antibody (13B, n=5), intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA plusisotype control (13C, n=10), and intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA plusintraperitoneal delivery of anti-CTLA-4 (13D, n=9). FIG. 13E is ascatterplot of tumor volumes at the start of virus injection in micetreated with PBS+isotype, Heat-MVA+Isotype, PBS+anti-CTLA-4, andHeat-MVA+anti-CTLA4 antibody. FIG. 13F is a Kaplan-Meier survival curveof tumor-bearing mice treated with PBS+Isotype, Heat-MVA+Isotype,PBS+anti-CTLA-4, and Heat-MVA+anti-CTLA4 antibody (*, p<0.05; **,p<0.01; ****, p<0.0001). A representative experiment is shown, repeatedtwice.

FIGS. 14A-E are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA is more effective than MVA ineradicating the injected tumors as well as controlling the growth ofnon-injected tumors. FIG. 14A is a scheme of treatment plan in whichB16-F10 melanomas were treated with either MVA or Heat-MVAintratumorally in a bilateral intradermal tumor implantation model. FIG.14B is a graph of replication curves of MVA in B16-F10 cells when theMOI was either 5 (open circles) or 0.05 (filled circles). FIG. 14C is aKaplan-Meier survival curve of tumor-bearing mice treated either PBS(open circles, n=7), MVA (filled squares, n=9), or Heat-MVA (filledcircles, n=9) (**, p<0.01; ***, p<0.001). FIG. 14D-E are graphs ofinjected (D) and non-injected (E) tumor volume plotted against time(days) after PBS injection. FIG. 14F-G are graphs of injected (F) andnon-injected (G) tumor volume plotted against time (days) after MVAinjection. FIG. 14H-I are graphs of injected (H) and non-injected (I)tumor volume over days after Heat-MVA injection. A representativeexperiment is shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 15A-B are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA is more effective than MVA orPBS in recruiting and activating immune cells in the non-injected tumorsin a bilateral B16-F10 melanoma model. Tumor-bearing mice were treatedwith intratumoral injections of PBS, MVA or Heat-MVA as described forFIG. 14A. The non-injected tumors were harvested at day 7 post firsttreatment after a total of two treatments. Tumor infiltrating immunecells were analyzed by FACS. FIG. 15A is a graph of absolute numbers oftumor infiltrating CD45⁺, CD103⁺CD11c⁺, CD3⁺ and CD8⁺ per gram ofnon-injected tumors after intratumoral injection of PBS, MVA or Heat-MVAto the contralateral tumors. FIG. 15B is a graph of absolute numbers oftumor infiltrating Granzyme B⁺CD8⁺, Ki67⁺CD8⁺, Granzyme B⁺CD4⁺, andKi67⁺CD4⁺ cells per gram of non-injected tumors after intratumoralinjection of PBS (n=5), MVA (n=5) or Heat-MVA (n=5) to the contralateraltumors. Data are means±SEM (n=5). A representative experiment is shown,repeated twice.

FIGS. 16A-I are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat Heat-MVA is less effective in eradicating B16-F10 melanomas inSTING-deficient mice or Batf3-deficient mice compared with wild-typecontrols in a bilateral tumor implantation model. FIG. 16A-B are graphsof injected (A) and non-injected (B) tumor volume plotted against time(days) after PBS injection (n=6). FIG. 16C-D are graphs of injected (C)and non-injected (D) tumor volume plotted against time (days) afterHeat-MVA injection in WT mice (n=10). FIG. 16E-F are graphs of injected(E) and non-injected (F) tumor volume over days after Heat-MVA injectionin STING^(Gt/Gt) mice (n=8). FIG. 16G-H are graphs of injected (G) andnon-injected (H) tumor volume over days after Heat-MVA injection inBatf3^(−/−) mice (n=6). FIG. 161 is a Kaplan-Meier survival curve oftumor-bearing WT, STING^(Gt/Gt), and Batf3^(−/−) mice treated with PBSor Heat-MVA (**, p<0.01; ****, p<0.0001). A representative experiment isshown, repeated once.

FIGS. 17A-D are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA is more effective in WT micethan in Batf3−/− mice in recruiting and activating immune cells in theinjected and non-injected tumors in a bilateral B16-F10 melanoma model.Tumor-bearing mice were treated with intratumoral injections of PBS orHeat-MVA as described for FIG. 14A. The non-injected tumors wereharvested at day 7 post first treatment after a total of two treatments.Tumor infiltrating immune cells were analyzed by FACS. FIG. 17A-B aregraphs of absolute numbers of tumor infiltrating CD3⁺ and CD8⁺ per gramof injected (A) and non-injected (B) tumors after intratumoral injectionof PBS or Heat-MVA to the right flank tumors on WT and Batf3^(−/−) mice.FIG. 17C-D are graphs of absolute numbers of tumor infiltratingKi67⁺CD8⁺ and Ki67⁺CD4⁺ cells per gram of injected (C) and non-injected(D) tumors after intratumoral injection of PBS or Heat-MVA to the rightflank tumors on WT and Batf3^(−/−) mice (**, p<0.01; ***,p<0.001; ****,p<0.0001). Data are means±SEM (n=4). A representative experiment isshown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 18A-L are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat the combination of intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA with systemicdelivery of anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, or anti-PD-L1 antibodiessignificantly increases the overall response and cure rates intumor-bearing animals. FIG. 18A is a scheme of treatment plan in whichB16-F10 melanomas were treated with either intratumoral delivery of PBSor Heat-MVA with or without systemic delivery of immune checkpointblockade antibodies in a bilateral intradermal tumor implantation model.FIG. 18B is a Kaplan-Meier survival curve of tumor-bearing mice treatedwith PBS (n=5), Heat-MVA+isotype control (n=10), Heat-MVA+anti-CTLA4antibody (n=10), Heat-MVA+anti-PD1 antibody (n=10), orHeat-MVA+anti-PD-L1 antibody (n=10; *, p<0.05; **, p<0.01; ****,p<0.0001). FIG. 18C-D are graphs of injected (C) and non-injected (D)tumor volumes over days after PBS injection. FIG. 18E-F are graphs ofinjected (E) and non-injected (F) tumor volumes over days afterintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA and intraperitoneal delivery ofisotype control. FIG. 18G-H are graphs of injected (G) and non-injected(H) tumor volumes over days after intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA andintraperitoneal delivery of anti-CTLA-4 antibody. FIG. 18I-J are graphsof injected (I) and non-injected (J) tumor volumes over days afterintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA and intraperitoneal delivery ofanti-PD-1 antibody. FIG. 18K-L are graphs of injected (K) andnon-injected (L) tumor volumes over days after intratumoral injection ofHeat-MVA and intraperitoneal delivery of anti-PD-L1 antibody. Arepresentative experiment is shown, repeated twice.

FIGS. 19A-E are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat UV-inactivated MVA (UV-MVA) induces type I IFN in cDCs via aSTING/IRF3-dependent cytosolic DNA-sensing pathway. FIG. 19A-B aregraphs of the concentrations of secreted IFN-α (A) and IFN-β (B) in themedium over time following MVA (filled circles), Heat-MVA (opensquares), or UV-MVA (filled squares) infection of cDCs (***, p<0.001).Data are means±SEM (n=3). A representative experiment is shown, repeatedtwice. FIG. 19C-D are bar graphs of the concentrations of secreted IFN-α(C) and IFN-β (D) in the medium of cDCs generated from STING^(Gt/Gt),IRF3^(−/−), and WT control mice and infected with UV-MVA. Data aremeans±SEM (n=3). A representative experiment is shown, repeated twice.FIG. 19E is a scanned image of a Western Blot showing protein levels ofp-IRF3, IRF3, STING, and β-actin in STING^(+/+) and STING^(GtGt) cDCsfollowing UV-MVA infection (hpi, hours post infection; NT, notreatment).

FIGS. 20A-H are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat UV-inactivated MVA (UV-MVA) induces inflammatory cytokines andchemokines from MC38 colon adenocarcinoma cell line, and intratumoralinjection of UV-MVA leads to tumor eradication and the development ofsystemic antitumor immunity with similar efficacies as Heat-MVA. FIG.20A-C are bar graphs of the concentrations of secreted IL-6 (A), CCL4(B), and CCL5 (C) in the medium of MC38 cells infected with MVA,Heat-MVA, UV-MVA, or mock control. Data are means±SEM (n=3). Arepresentative experiment is shown, repeated twice. FIG. 20D-F aregraphs of tumor volumes v. time (days) after intratumoral injection ofPBS (D), Heat-MVA (E), or UV-MVA (F). FIG. 20G is a Kaplan-Meiersurvival curve of tumor-bearing mice injected with PBS (filled circles,n=5), or Heat-MVA (filled squares, n=10), or UV-MVA (filled triangles,n=7). FIG. 20H is a Kaplan-Meier survival curve of naïve mice (closedcircles, n=5), Heat-MVA-treated mice (filled squares, n=7), andUV-MVA-treated mice (filled triangles, n=5) re-challenged at thecontralateral side with a lethal dose of MC38 colon adenocarcinomacells. A representative experiment is shown, repeated once.

FIGS. 21A-N are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat the combination of intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA with systemicdelivery of anti-CTLA-4 or anti-PD-L1 antibodies significantly increasesthe overall response and cure rates in tumor-bearing animals. FIG. 21A-Bare graphs of injected (A) and non-injected (B) tumor volume plottedagainst time (days) after PBS injection. FIG. 21C-D are graphs ofinjected (C) and non-injected (D) tumor volume plotted against time(days) after intratumoral injection of PBS and intraperitoneal deliveryof anti-CTLA-4 antibody. FIG. 21E-F are graphs of injected (E) andnon-injected (F) tumor volume plotted against time (days) afterintratumoral injection of PBS and intraperitoneal delivery ofanti-anti-PD-L1 antibody. FIG. 21G-H are graphs of injected (G) andnon-injected (H) tumor volume plotted against time (days) afterintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA and intraperitoneal delivery ofisotype antibody control. FIG. 21I-J are graphs of injected (I) andnon-injected (J) tumor volume plotted against time (days) afterintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA and intraperitoneal delivery ofanti-CTLA-4 antibody. FIG. 21K-L are graphs of injected (K) andnon-injected (L) tumor volume plotted against time (days) afterintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA and intraperitoneal delivery ofanti-PD-L1 antibody. FIG. 21M is a Kaplan-Meier survival curve oftumor-bearing mice treated with PBS (n=6), anti-CTLA4 antibody (n=7), oranti-PD-L1 antibody (n=7; ***, p<0.001). FIG. 21N is a Kaplan-Meiersurvival curve of tumor-bearing mice treated with PBS (n=6),Heat-MVA+isotype control (n=10), Heat-MVA+anti-CTLA4 antibody (n=10), orHeat-MVA+anti-PD-L1 antibody (n=10; *, p<0.05; **, p<0.01; ****,p<0.0001). A representative experiment is shown, repeated once.

FIGS. 22A-H are a series of graphical representations of data showingthat the co-administration of Heat-MVA and anti-CTLA-4 intratumorallysignificantly increases the overall response and cure rates in abilateral B16-F10 tumor implantation model. FIG. 22A-B are graphs ofinjected (A) and non-injected (B) tumor volume plotted against time(days) after PBS injection (n=10). FIG. 22C-D are graphs of injected (C)and non-injected (D) tumor volume plotted against time (days) afterintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA and isotype control antibody (n=10).FIG. 21E-F are graphs of injected (E) and non-injected (F) tumor volumeplotted against time (days) after intratumoral co-administration ofHeat-MVA and anti-CTLA-4 antibody at one tenth of the dose used forintraperitoneal delivery (n=10). FIG. 22G-H are graphs of injected (G)and non-injected (H) tumor volume plotted against time (days) afterintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA and intraperitoneal delivery ofanti-CTLA-4 antibody (n=10).

DETAILED DESCRIPTION Definitions:

As used herein the following terms shall have the meanings ascribed tothem below unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:

“Cancer” refers to a class of diseases of humans and animalscharacterized by uncontrolled cellular growth. Unless otherwiseexplicitly indicated, the term “cancer” may be used hereininterchangeably with the terms “tumor,” (which in turn includes bothprimary and metastatic tumors) “malignancy,” “hyperproliferation” and“neoplasm(s);” the term “cancer cell(s)” is interchangeable with theterms “tumor cell(s),” “malignant cell(s),” “hyperproliferativecell(s),” and “neoplastic cell(s)”.

“Melanoma” refers to a malignant neoplasm originating from cells thatare capable of producing melanin. The term melanoma is synonymous with“malignant melanoma”. Melanoma metastasizes widely, involving apatient's lymph nodes, skin, liver, lungs and brain tissues.

“Solid tumor” refers to all neoplastic cell growth and proliferation,primary or metastatic, and all pre-cancerous and cancerous cells andtissues, except for hematologic cancers such as lymphomas, leukemias andmultiple myeloma. Examples of solid tumors include, but are not limitedto: fibrosarcoma, myxosarcoma, liposarcoma, chondrosarcoma, osteogenicsarcoma, chordoma, angiosarcoma, endotheliosarcoma, lymphangiosarcoma,lymphangioendotheliosarcoma, synovioma, mesothelioma, Ewing's tumor,leiomyosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, colon carcinoma, pancreatic cancer,breast cancer, ovarian cancer, prostate cancer, squamous cell carcinoma,basal cell carcinoma, adenocarcinoma, sweat gland carcinoma, sebaceousgland carcinoma, papillary carcinoma, papillary adenocarcinomas,cystadenocarcinoma, medullary carcinoma, bronchogenic carcinoma, renalcell carcinoma, hepatoma, bile duct carcinoma, choriocarcinoma,seminoma, embryonal carcinoma, Wilms' tumor, cervical cancer, testiculartumor, lung carcinoma, small cell lung carcinoma, bladder carcinoma,epithelial carcinoma, glioma, astrocytoma, medulloblastoma,craniopharyngioma, ependymoma, pinealoma, hemangioblastoma, acousticneuroma, oligodendroglioma, meningioma, melanoma, neuroblastoma, andretinoblastoma. Some of the most common solid tumors for which thecompositions and methods of the present disclosure would be usefulinclude: head-and-neck cancer, rectal adenocarcinoma, glioma,medulloblastoma, urothelial carcinoma, pancreatic adenocarcinoma,endometrial cancer, ovarian cancer, prostate adenocarcinoma, non-smallcell lung cancer (squamous and adenocarcinoma), small cell lung cancer,melanoma, breast carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, and hepatocellularcarcinoma.

“Metastasis” refers to the spread of cancer from its primary site toneighboring tissues or distal locations in the body. Cancer cells canbreak away from a primary tumor, penetrate into lymphatic and bloodvessels, circulate through the bloodstream, and grow in in normaltissues elsewhere in the body. Metastasis is a sequential process,contingent on tumor cells (or cancer stem cells) breaking off from theprimary tumor, traveling through the bloodstream or lymphatics, andstopping at a distant site. Once at another site, cancer cellsre-penetrate through the blood vessels or lymphatic walls, continue tomultiply, and eventually form a new tumor (metastatic tumor). In someembodiments, this new tumor is referred to as a metastatic (orsecondary) tumor.

“Immune response” refers to the action of one or more of lymphocytes,antigen presenting cells, phagocytic cells, granulocytes, and solublemacromolecules produced by the above cells or the liver (includingantibodies, cytokines, and complement) that results in selective damageto, destruction of, or elimination from the human body of cancerouscells, metastatic tumor cells, etc. An immune response may include acellular response, such as a T cell response that is an alteration(modulation, e.g., significant enhancement, stimulation, activation,impairment, or inhibition) of cellular function, i.e., a T cellfunction. A T cell response may include generation, proliferation orexpansion, or stimulation of a particular type of T cell, or subset of Tcells, for example, effector CD4⁺, cytotoxic CD8⁺, or natural killer(NK) cells. Such T cell subsets may be identified by detecting one ormore cell receptors or cell surface molecules (e.g., CD or cluster ofdifferentiation molecules). A T cell response may also include alteredexpression (statistically significant increase or decrease) of acellular factor, such as a soluble mediator (e.g., a cytokine,lymphokine, cytokine binding protein, or interleukin) that influencesthe differentiation or proliferation of other cells. For example, Type Iinterferon (IFN-α/β) is a critical regulator of the innate immunity[71]. Animal and human studies have shown a role for IFN-α/β in directlyinfluencing the fate of both CD4⁺ and CD8⁺T cells during the initialphases of antigen recognition anti-tumor immune response. Type I IFN isinduced in response to activation of dendritic cells, in turn a sentinelof the innate immune system.

“Tumor immunity” refers to the process by which tumors evade recognitionand clearance by the immune system. Thus, as a therapeutic concept,tumor immunity is “treated” when such evasion is attenuated oreliminated, and the tumors are recognized and attacked by the immunesystem. An example of tumor recognition is tumor binding, and examplesof tumor attack are tumor reduction (in number, size or both) and tumorclearance.

“T cell” refers to a thymus derived lymphocyte that participates in avariety of cell-mediated adaptive immune reactions.

“Helper T cell” refers to a CD4+ T cell; helper T cells recognizeantigen bound to MHC Class II molecules. There are at least two types ofhelper T cells, Th1 and Th2, which produce different cytokines.

“Cytotoxic T cell” refers to a T cell that usually bears CD8 molecularmarkers on its surface (CD8+) and that functions in cell-mediatedimmunity by destroying a target cell having a specific antigenicmolecule on its surface. Cytotoxic T cells also release Granzyme, aserine protease that can enter target cells via the perforin-formed poreand induce apoptosis (cell death). Granzyme serves as a marker ofCytotoxic phenotype. Other names for cytotoxic T cell include CTL,cytolytic T cell, cytolytic T lymphocyte, killer T cell, or killer Tlymphocyte. Targets of cytotoxic T cells may include virus-infectedcells, cells infected with bacterial or protozoal parasites, or cancercells. Most cytotoxic T cells have the protein CD8 present on their cellsurfaces. CD8 is attracted to portions of the Class I MHC molecule.Typically, a cytotoxic T cell is a CD8+ cell.

“Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes” refers to white blood cells of asubject afflicted with a cancer (such as melanoma), that are resident inor otherwise have left the circulation (blood or lymphatic fluid) andhave migrated into a tumor.

“Immune checkpoint inhibitor(s)” or “immune checkpoint blocking agent”refers to molecules that completely or partially reduce, inhibit,interfere with or modulate the activity of one or more checkpointproteins. Checkpoint proteins regulate T-cell activation or function.Checkpoint proteins include, but are not limited to CTLA-4 and itsligands CD80 and CD86; PD-1 and its ligands PDL1 and PDL2; LAG3, B7-H3,B7-H4, TIM3, ICOS, and BTLA [72].

“Parenteral” when used in the context of administration of a therapeuticsubstance includes any route of administration other than administrationthrough the alimentary tract. Particularly relevant for the methodsdisclosed herein are intravenous (including for example through thehepatic portal vein), intratumoral or intrathecal administration.

“Antibody” refers to an immunoglobulin molecule which specifically bindsto an antigen or to an antigen-binding fragment of such a molecule.Thus, antibodies can be intact immunoglobulins derived from naturalsources or from recombinant sources and can be immunoreactive(antigen-binding) fragments or portions of intact immunoglobulins. Theantibodies may exist in a variety of forms including, for example,polyclonal antibodies, monoclonal antibodies, Fv, Fab and F(ab)2, aswell as single chain antibodies (scFv) humanized antibodies, chimericantibodies, human recombinant antibodies and bi- and tri-specificantibodies.

“Oncolytic virus” refers to a virus that preferentially infects cancercells, replicates in such cells, and induces lysis of the cancer cellsthrough its replication process. Nonlimiting examples of naturallyoccurring oncolytic viruses include vesicular stomatitis virus,reovirus, as well as viruses engineered to be oncoselective such asadenovirus, Newcastle disease virus and herpes simplex virus [19,73-75]. Vaccinia virus infects many types of cells but replicatespreferentially in tumor cells due to the fact that tumor cells have ametabolism that favors replication, exhibit activation of certainpathways that also favor replication and create an environment thatevades the innate immune system, which also favors viral replication.Heat-inactivated MVA does not fit the definition of oncolytic virus.

“MVA” means “modified vaccinia Ankara” and refers to a highly attenuatedstrain of vaccinia derived from the Ankara strain and developed for useas a vaccine and vaccine adjuvant. The original MVA was isolated fromthe wild-type Ankara strain by successive passage through chickenembryonic cells. Treated thus, it lost about 15% of the genome ofwild-type vaccinia including its ability to replicate efficiently inprimate (including human) cells [76]. The smallpox vaccination strainMVA: marker, genetic structure, experience gained with the parenteralvaccination and behavior in organisms with a debilitated defensemechanism. MVA is considered an appropriate candidate for development asa recombinant vector for gene or vaccination delivery against infectiousdiseases or tumors [77]. MVA has a genome of 178 kb in length and asequence first disclosed in Antoine, G et al [78]. Sequences are alsodisclosed in Genbank U94848.1. Clinical grade MVA is commercially andpublicly available from Bavarian Nordic A/S Kvistgaard, Denmark.Additionally, MVA is available from ATCC, Rockville, Md. and from CMCN(Institut Pasteur Collection Nationale des Microorganismes) Paris,France. Mutant MVA E3L knockout (ΔE3L-MVA) and its preparation have beendescribed for example in U.S. Pat. No. 7,049,145.

“Heat-inactivated MVA” or “heat MVA” means MVA which has been furthertreated by exposure to heat under conditions that do not destroy itsimmunogenicity or its ability to enter target cells (tumor cells) butremove residual replication ability of the virus as well as factors thatinhibit the host's immune response (for example, such factors as inhibitthe induction of IFN Type I in infected cells). An example of suchconditions is exposure to a temperature within the range of about 50 toabout 60° C. for a period of time of about an hour. Other times andtemperatures can be determined with routine experimentation and IFN TypeI induction in infected cDC's can be compared to the Heat-MVA used inexperiments described herein and should be higher than that of MVA. Inone experiment conducted by the present inventors, infection of cDCs byMVA treated with a combination of 65° C. and 1-hour exposure failed toinduce IFN Type I. This combination of safety and strong immunogenicitymakes Heat-MVA particularly attractive compared to WT vaccinia and evenMVA.

“UV-inactivated MVA” or “UV-MVA” means MVA that has been inactivated byexposure to UV under conditions that do not destroy its immunogenicityor its ability to enter target cells (tumor cells) but remove residualreplication ability of the virus. An example of such conditions, whichcan be useful in the present methods, is exposure to UV using forexample a 365 nm UV bulb for a period of about 30 min to about 1 hour[56, 79]. Again, as explained for Heat-MVA above, the limits of theseconditions of UV wavelength and exposure can be determined by routineexperimentation by determining Type I IFN induced by UV-MVA havingreceived a given exposure and comparing it to the Type I IFN induced byUV-MVA used in the experiments below and to untreated MVA. UV-MVA issimilarly safe to Heat-MVA and also induces significant Type I IFN.

Accordingly, “inactivated MVA” shall be used as a generic termcomprising heat-inactivated MVA and UV-inactivated MVA which areinfective, nonreplicative and do not suppress IFN Type I production ininfected DC cells. MVA inactivated by a combination of heat and UVradiation is also within the scope of the present disclosure.

“Subject” means any animal (mammalian, human or other) patient that canbe afflicted with cancer.

“Therapeutically effective amount” or “effective amount” refers to asufficient amount of an agent when administered at one or more dosagesand for a period of time sufficient to provide a desired biologicalresult in alleviating, curing or palliating a disease. In the presentdisclosure, an effective amount of the inactivated-MVA is an amount that(administered for a suitable period of time and at a suitable frequency)reduces the number of cancer cells; or reduces the tumor size oreradicates the tumor; or inhibits (i.e., slows down or stops) cancercell infiltration into peripheral organs; inhibits (i.e., slows down orstops) metastatic growth; inhibits (i.e., stabilizes or arrests) tumorgrowth; allows for treatment of the tumor, and/or induces an immuneresponse against the tumor. An appropriate therapeutic amount in anyindividual case may be determined by one of ordinary skill in the artusing routine experimentation in light of the present disclosure. Suchdetermination will begin with amounts found effective in vitro andamounts found effective in animals. The therapeutically effective amountwill be initially determined based on the concentration orconcentrations found to confer a benefit to cells in culture. Effectiveamounts can be extrapolated from data within the cell culture and can beadjusted up or down based on factors such as detailed herein. An exampleof an effective amount range is from 10⁵ viral particles to about 10¹²viral particles per administration.

With particular reference to the viral-based immunostimulatory agentsdisclosed herein, “therapeutically effective amount” or “effectiveamount” refers to an amount of a composition comprising inactivated MVAsufficient to reduce, inhibit, or abrogate tumor cell growth, therebyreducing or eliminating the tumor, or sufficient to inhibit, reduce orabrogate metastatic spread either in vitro or in a subject or to elicitan immune response against the tumor that will eventually result in oneor more of reduction, inhibition and/or abrogation as the case may be.The reduction, inhibition, or eradication of tumor cell growth may bethe result of necrosis, apoptosis, or an immune response or acombination of two or more of the foregoing. The amount that istherapeutically effective may vary depending on such factors as theparticular inactivated MVA used in the composition, the age andcondition of the subject being treated, the extent of tumor formation,the presence or absence of other therapeutic modalities, and the like.Similarly, the dosage of the composition to be administered and thefrequency of its administration will depend on a variety of factors,such as the potency of the active ingredient, the duration of itsactivity once administered, the route of administration, the size, age,sex and physical condition of the subject, the risk of adverse reactionsand the judgment of the medical practitioner. The compositions areadministered in a variety of dosage forms, such injectable solutions.

With particular reference to combination therapy with an immunecheckpoint inhibitor, “therapeutically effective amount” for an immunecheckpoint blocking agent” shall mean an amount of an immune checkpointblocking agent sufficient to block an immune checkpoint from avertingapoptosis response in tumor cells of the subject being treated. Thereare several immune checkpoint blocking agents approved, in clinicaltrials or still otherwise under development including CD28 inhibitorssuch as CTL4 inhibitors (e.g., ipilimumab), PD-1 inhibitors (e.g.,nivolumab, pembrolizumab, pidilizumab, lambrolizumab) PD-L1 inhibitors(MPDL3280A, BMS-936559, MEDI4736, MSB 00107180) ICOS and BTLA or decoymolecules of them. Dosage ranges of the foregoing are known in orreadily within the skill in the art as several dosing clinical trialshave been completed, making extrapolation to other agents possible.

Preferably, the tumor expresses the particular checkpoint but this isnot strictly necessary as immune checkpoint blocking agents block moregenerally immune suppressive mechanisms within the tumors, elicited bytumor cells, stromal cell, and tumor infiltrating immune cells.

For example, the CTLA4 inhibitor ipilimumab, when administered asadjuvant therapy after surgery in melanoma is administered at 1-2 mg/mLover 90 minutes for a total infusion amount of 3 mg/kg every three weeksfor a total of 4 doses. This therapy is often accompanied by severe evenlife-threatening immune-mediated adverse reactions, which limits thetolerated dose as well as the cumulative amount that can beadministered. It is anticipated that it will be possible to reduce thedose and/or cumulative amount of ipilimumab when it is administeredconjointly with inactivated MVA. In particular, in light of theexperimental results set forth below, it is anticipated that it will befurther possible to reduce the CTLA4 inhibitor's dose if it isadministered directly to the tumor simultaneously or sequentially withinactivated MVA. Accordingly, the amounts provided above for ipilimumabwill be a starting point for determining the particular dosage andcumulative amount to be given to a patient in conjoint administrationbut dosing studies will be required to determine optimum amounts.

Pembrolizumab is prescribed for administration as adjuvant therapy inmelanoma diluted to 25 mg/mL is administered at a dosage of 2 mg/kg over30 minutes every three weeks.

Nivolumab is prescribed for administration at 3 mg/kg as an intravenousinfusion over 60 minutes every two weeks.

“Pharmaceutically acceptable excipient” includes pharmaceuticallyacceptable carriers or diluents, such as any and all solvents,dispersion media, coatings, isotonic and absorption delaying agents andthe like. It also includes preservatives and antibacterial andantifungal agents. The use of such media and agents for biologicallyactive substances is well known in the art. Further details ofexcipients are provided below.

“Delivering” used in connection with depositing the inactivated-MVA ofthe present disclosure in the tumor microenvironment whether this isdone by local administration to the tumor or by systemic administration,for example intravenous route. The term focuses on inactivated-MVA thatreaches the tumor itself.

“Conjoint administration” herein refers to administration of a secondtherapeutic modality in combination with inactivated MVA for example animmune checkpoint blocking agent administered and in close temporalproximity with the inactivated MVA. For example, a PD-1/PDL-1 inhibitorand/or a CTLA4 inhibitor (in more specific embodiments, an antibody) canbe administered simultaneously with the heat-inactivated MVA (byintravenous or intratumoral injection when the inactivated-MVA isadministered intratumorally or systemically as stated above) or beforeor after the inactivated-MVA administration. If the inactivated MVAadministration and the immune checkpoint blocking agent are administered1-7 days apart or even up to three weeks apart, this would be within“close temporal proximity” as stated herein.

In one embodiment, the present disclosure relates to a method foreliciting an antitumor immune response in subjects with tumorscomprising delivering to the tumor an amount of inactivated MVAeffective to bring about one or more of the following:

increase cytotoxic CD8+ T cells within the tumor and/or intumor-draining lymph nodes;

induce maturation of dendritic cells infiltrating said tumor throughinduction of type I IFN;

induce effector T cells in the subject recognizing tumor cells withinthe tumor and/or in tumor draining lymph nodes;

reduce immune suppressive (regulatory) CD4+ T cells within the tumor;and

induce cells of the tumor to express MHC Class I on their surface and toproduce one or more of Type I IFN or other inflammatory cytokines orchemokines.

The present inventors have explored the mechanism of the immune responseand concluded that it is initiated by the cytosolic DNA-sensing pathwaymediated by cGAS/STING which mediates production of Type 1 IFN. Furtherinsights into the mechanism and the immune cells that are recruited areprovided in the Examples. The conclusions presented therein are notconfined to the specific experimental milieu where these mechanisms arebeing elucidated.

In one embodiment, the present disclosure provides a method of treatinga subject diagnosed with a solid tumor comprising delivering to thetumor a therapeutic effective amount of the Heat-MVA described herein.

In one embodiment, the present disclosure provides a method for inducinganti-tumor immunity in a subject diagnosed with cancer comprisingadministering to the subject a therapeutically effective amount ofinactivated MVA. The methods of the present disclosure include inductionof anti-tumor immunity that can reduce the size of the tumor, eradicatethe tumor, inhibit growth of the tumor, or inhibit metastasis ormetastatic growth of the tumor.

In another embodiment, the present disclosure provides a method forenhancing, stimulating, or eliciting, in a subject diagnosed with asolid malignant tumor, an anti-tumor immune response that may include aninnate immune response and/or an adaptive immune response such as a Tcell response by exposing the tumor to inactivated MVA in atherapeutically effective amount.

In specific embodiments, the present disclosure provides methods ofeliciting an immune response that mediates adaptive immune responsesboth in terms of T-cell cytotoxicity directed against tumor cells and interms of eliciting T helper cells also directed against tumor cells. Themethods comprise administering to a subject intratumorally orintravenously a composition comprising a nonreplicative heat- orUV-inactivated MVA wherein administration of said composition results ina tumor-specific immune response against the tumor and, eventually, inreduction, inhibition or abrogation of tumor growth and/or in inhibitionof metastatic growth. Indeed, the present inventors have shown thatcancer cells are being killed and that the immune response can migrateto remote locations, as would be the case with metastases.

In some embodiments, the present disclosure provides methods ofeliciting an immune response that mediates adaptive immune responsesboth in terms of T-cell cytotoxicity directed against tumor cells and interms of eliciting T helper cells also directed against tumor cells. Themethods comprise administering to a subject parenterally a compositioncomprising an inactivated-MVA wherein administration of said compositionresults in a tumor-specific immune response against the tumor and,eventually, in reduction, inhibition or eradication of tumor growthand/or in inhibition of metastatic growth. Indeed, the present inventorshave shown that cancer cells are being killed and that the immuneresponse can migrate to remote locations, as would be the case withmetastases.

Because inactivated MVA is not replication competent, it does not exertits effect on the immune system the same way as replication competentvaccines or vectors. Thus, while it is believed that stimulation of theimmune system is a barrier to efficacy for oncolysis [19], inactivatedMVA is able to harness the innate immune system to stimulate adaptiveimmunity, both in terms of cytotoxicity and more broadly of T effectorcell activation against the tumor.

The present disclosure thus provides a method for treating a solidmalignant tumor, delivering to a tumor of the subject an amount ofinactivated-MVA effective to bring an increase of cytotoxic CD8+ cellsand reduction of regulatory CD4+ cells in the tumor and inducing animmune response in a subject diagnosed with solid tumor.

The present disclosure also provides a method for generating antitumorsystemic immunity by treating a solid malignant tumor, comprisingdelivering to a tumor of the subject an amount of inactivated-MVAeffective to bring about a considerable even dramatic increase in immunecells in the non-injected tumors, including CD103⁺ DCs, cytotoxic CD8⁺cells and CD4⁺ effector cells, and thereby causing one or both ofrejection of non-injected tumors in said subject and resistance to tumormetastasis (which the present inventors test by tumor rechallenge).

Modified Vaccinia Ankara (MVA)

Modified Vaccinia Ankara (MVA) virus is a member of the generaOrthopoxvirus in the family of Poxviridae. MVA was generated byapproximately 570 serial passages on chicken embryo fibroblasts (CEF) ofthe Ankara strain of vaccinia virus (CVA) [80]. As a consequence ofthese long-term passages, the resulting MVA virus contains extensivegenome deletions and is highly host cell restricted to avian cells [30].It was shown in a variety of animal models that the resulting MVA issignificantly avirulent [76].

The safety and immunogenicity of MVA has been extensively tested anddocumented in clinical trials, particularly against the human smallpoxdisease. These studies included over 120,000 individuals and havedemonstrated excellent efficacy and safety in humans. Moreover, comparedto other vaccinia based vaccines, MVA has weakened virulence(infectiousness) while it triggers a good specific immune response.Thus, MVA has been established as a safe vaccine vector, with theability to induce a specific immune response.

Due to above mentioned characteristics, MVA became an attractive targetfor to the development of engineered MVA vectors, used for recombinantgene expression and vaccines. As a vaccine vector, MVA has beeninvestigated against numerous pathological conditions, including HIV,tuberculosis and malaria, as well as cancer [33, 34].

It has been demonstrated that MVA infection of human monocyte-deriveddendritic cells (DC) causes DC activation, characterized by theupregulation of co-stimulatory molecules and secretion ofproinflammatory cytokines [56]. In this respect, MVA differs fromstandard wild type Vaccinia virus (WT-VAC), which fails to activate DCs.Dendritic cells can be classified into two main subtypes: conventionaldendritic cells (cDCs) and plasmacytoid dendritic cells (pDCs). Theformer, especially the CD8+ subtype, are particularly adapted topresenting antigens to T cells; the latter are strong producers of TypeI IFN.

Viral infection of human cells results in activation of an innate immuneresponse (the first line of defense) mediated by type I interferons,notably interferon-alpha (α). This normally leads to activation of animmunological “cascade,” with recruitment and proliferation of activatedT cells (both CTL and helper) and eventually with antibody production.However, viruses express factors that dampen immune responses of thehost. MVA is a better immunogen than WT-VAC and replicates poorly inmammalian cells [81].

However, it is not entirely nonreplicative and, as the present inventorsshow, contains some immunosuppressive activity.

Immune Response

In addition to induction of the immune response by up-regulation ofparticular immune system activities (such as antibody and/or cytokineproduction, or activation of cell mediated immunity), immune responsesmay also include suppression, attenuation, or any other down-regulationof detectable immunity, so as to reestablish homeostasis and preventexcessive damage to the host's own organs and tissues. In someembodiments, an immune response that is induced according to the methodsof the present disclosure generates cytotoxic CD8⁺ T cells or activatedT helper cells or both that can bring about directly or indirectly thedeath, or loss of the ability to propagate, of a tumor cell.

Induction of an immune response by the methods of the present disclosuremay be determined by detecting any of a variety of well-knownimmunological parameters [82, 83]. Induction of an immune response maytherefore be established by any of a number of well-known assays,including immunological assays, Such assays include, but need not belimited to, in vivo, ex vivo, or in vitro determination of solubleimmunoglobulins or antibodies; soluble mediators such as cytokines,chemokines, hormones, growth factors and the like as well as othersoluble small peptides, carbohydrate, nucleotide and/or lipid mediators;cellular activation state changes as determined by altered functional orstructural properties of cells of the immune system, for example cellproliferation, altered motility, altered intracellular cation gradientor concentration (such as calcium); phosphorylation or dephosphorylationof cellular polypeptides; induction of specialized activities such asspecific gene expression or cytolytic behavior; cellular differentiationby cells of the immune system, including altered surface antigenexpression profiles, or the onset of apoptosis (programmed cell death);or any other criterion by which the presence of an immune response maybe detected. For example, cell surface markers that distinguish immunecell types may be detected by specific antibodies that bind to CD4+,CD8+, or NK cells. Other markers and cellular components that can bedetected include but are not limited to interferon γ (IFN-γ), tumornecrosis factor (TNF), IFN-α, IFN-β, IL-6, and CCL5. Common methods fordetecting the immune response include, but are not limited to flowcytometry, ELISA, immunohistochemistry. Procedures for performing theseand similar assays are widely known and may be found, for example inLetkovits (Immunology Methods Manual: The Comprehensive Sourcebook ofTechniques, Current Protocols in Immunology, 1998).

Pharmaceutical Compositions and Preparations

Pharmaceutical compositions comprising inactivated-MVA may contain oneor more pharmaceutically acceptable excipients, such as a carrier ordiluent. These are ingredients which do not interfere with activity oreffectiveness of the vaccine components of the present disclosure andthat are not toxic A carrier or diluent can be a solvent or dispersionmedium containing, for example, water, dextrose solution, polyol (forexample, glycerol, propylene glycol, and liquid polyethylene glycol, andthe like), serum albumin, Ringer's solution, suitable mixtures thereof,and vegetable oils. The proper fluidity can be maintained, for example,by the use of a coating such as lecithin, by the maintenance of therequired particle size in the case of dispersion and by the use ofsurfactants and/or wetting agents such as sodium lauryl sulfate orethanol. The prevention of the action of microorganisms can be effectedby various preservatives, antibacterial and antifungal agents, forexample, parabens, chlorobutanol, phenol, sorbic acid, thimerosal,benzalcomium chloride, benzethonium chloride and the like. In manycases, it will be preferable to include isotonic agents, for example,sugars like mannitol sorbitol, lactose or sodium or potassium chloride.Prolonged absorption of the injectable compositions can be brought aboutby the use in the compositions of agents delaying absorption, forexample, aluminum monostearate and gelatin.

Pharmaceutical compositions and preparations comprising inactivated-MVAmay be manufactured by means of conventional mixing, dissolving,emulsifying, or lyophilizing processes. Pharmaceutical viralcompositions may be formulated in conventional manner using one or morephysiologically acceptable carriers, diluents, excipients or auxiliariesthat facilitate formulating virus preparations suitable for in vitro, invivo, or ex vivo use. The compositions can be combined with one or moreadditional biologically active agents (for example paralleladministration of GM-CSF) and may be formulated with a pharmaceuticallyacceptable carrier, diluent or excipient to generate pharmaceutical(including biologic) or veterinary compositions of the instantdisclosure suitable for parenteral or intra-tumoral administration.

Many types of formulation are possible and well-known. The particulartype chosen is dependent upon the route of administration chosen, as iswell-recognized in the art. For example, systemic formulations willgenerally be designed for administration by injection, e.g.,intravenous, as well as those designed for intratumoral administrationPreferably, the systemic or intratumoral formulation is sterile.

Sterile injectable solutions are prepared by incorporatinginactivated-MVA in the required amount of the appropriate solvent withvarious other ingredients enumerated herein, as required, followed bysuitable sterilization means. Generally, dispersions are prepared byincorporating the active ingredients into a sterile vehicle thatcontains the basic dispersion medium and the required other ingredientsfrom those enumerated above. In the case of sterile powders for thepreparation of sterile injectable solutions, the preferred methods ofpreparation are vacuum drying and freeze-drying techniques, which yielda powder of the inactive-MVA plus any additional desired ingredient froma previously sterile-filtered solution thereof.

In some embodiments, the inactivated-MVA compositions of the presentdisclosure may be formulated in aqueous solutions, or in physiologicallycompatible solutions or buffers such as Hanks's solution, Ringer'ssolution, mannitol solutions or physiological saline buffer. In certainembodiments, any of the inactivated-MVA compositions may containformulator agents, such as suspending, stabilizing penetrating ordispersing agents, buffers, lyoprotectants or preservatives such aspolyethylene glycol, polysorbate 80, 1-dodecylhexahydro-2H-azepin-2-one(laurocapran), oleic acid, sodium citrate, Tris HCl, dextrose, propyleneglycol, mannitol , polysorbate polyethylenesorbitan monolaurate(Tween®-20), isopropyl myristate, benzyl alcohol, isopropyl alcohol,ethanol sucrose, trehalose and other such generally known in the art maybe used in any of the compositions of the instant disclosure [84].

The biologic or pharmaceutical compositions of the present disclosurecan be formulated to allow the virus contained therein to be availableto infect tumor cells upon administration of the composition to asubject. The level of virus in serum, tumors, and if desired othertissues after administration can be monitored by variouswell-established techniques, such as antibody-based assays (e.g., ELISA,immunohistochemistry, etc.).

Dosage of Inactivated-MVA

In general, the subject is administered a dosage of inactivated-MVA inthe range of about 10⁵ to about 10¹⁰ plaque forming units (pfu),although a lower or higher dose may be administered as will bedetermined by a person of ordinary skill. In a preferred embodiment,dosage is about 10⁶-10⁹ pfu. This dosage can be formulated in unitdosage forms of about 1 to about 10 ml. The equivalence of pfu to virusparticles can differ according to the specific pfu titration methodused. Generally, pfu is equal to about 5 to 100 virus particles. Atherapeutically effective amount of inactivated-MVA can be administeredin one or more divided doses for a prescribed period of time and at aprescribed frequency of administration. For example, therapeuticallyeffective amount of inactivated MVA in accordance with the presentdisclosure may vary according to factors such as the disease state, age,sex, weight, and general condition of the subject, the size of thetumor, the ability of inactivated-MVA to elicit a desired immunologicalresponse to a degree sufficient to combat the tumor in the particularsubject and the ability of the immune system of the subject to mountsuch a response.

As is apparent to persons working in the field of cancer therapy,variation in dosage will necessarily occur depending for example on thecondition of the subject being treated, route of administration and thesubject's responsiveness to the therapy and the maximum tolerated dosefor the subject. In delivering inactivated-MVA to a subject, the dosagewill also vary depending upon such factors as the general medicalcondition, previous medical history, disease progression, tumor burdenand the like.

It may be advantageous to formulate compositions of present disclosurein dosage unit form for ease of administration and uniformity of dosage.Dosage unit form as used herein refers to physically discrete unitssuited as unitary dosages for the mammalian subjects to be treated; eachunit containing a predetermined quantity of active material calculatedto produce the desired therapeutic effect in association with therequired pharmaceutically acceptable carrier.

Administration and Therapeutic Regimen of Inactivated-MVA

Administration of inactivated-MVA can be achieved using a combination ofroutes, including parenteral, for example intratumoral, or intravenousadministration. In one embodiment, inactivated-MVA is administereddirectly into the tumor, e.g. by intratumoral injection, where a directlocal reaction is desired. Additionally, administration routes ofinactivated-MVA can vary, e.g., first administration using anintratumoral injection, and subsequent administration via an intravenousinjection, or any combination thereof. A therapeutically effectiveamount of inactivated-MVA injection can be administered for a prescribedperiod of time and at a prescribed frequency of administration. Incertain embodiments, inactivated-MVA can be used in conjunction withother therapeutic treatments. For example, inactivated-MVA can beadministered in a neoadjuvant (preoperative) or adjuvant (postoperative)setting for subjects inflicted with bulky primary tumors. It isanticipated that such optimized therapeutic regimen will induce animmune response against the tumor, and reduce the tumor burden in asubject before and/or after primary therapy, such as surgery.Furthermore, inactivated-MVA can be administered in conjunction withother therapeutic treatments such as chemotherapy or radiation.

In certain embodiments, the inactivated-MVA virus is administeredrepeatedly at spaced apart intervals, for example at least once weeklyor monthly but can be administered more often if needed, such as twotimes weekly for several weeks, months, years or even indefinitely aslong as s persist. More frequent administrations are contemplated iftolerated and if they result in sustained or increased benefits.Benefits of the present methods include but are not limited to thefollowing: reduction of the number of cancer cells, reduction of thetumor size, eradication of tumor, inhibition of cancer cell infiltrationinto peripheral organs, inhibition or stabilization of metastaticgrowth, inhibition or stabilization of tumor growth, and stabilizationor improvement of quality of life. Furthermore, the benefits may includeinduction of an immune response against the tumor, activation of Thelper cells, an increase of cytotoxic CDS⁺ T cells, or reduction ofregulatory CD4⁺ cells. For example, in the context of melanoma or, abenefit may be a lack of recurrences or metastasis within one, two,three, four, five or more years of the initial diagnosis of melanoma.Similar assessments can be made for colon cancer and other solid tumors.

In certain other embodiments, the tumor mass or tumor cells are treatedwith inactivated-MVA in vivo, ex vivo, or in vitro.

EXAMPLES Materials and Methods

Generally, reagents employed herein are from commercial sources or I,not, counterparts thereof are available commercially or publicly.

Viruses and Cell Lines

MVA viruses were kindly provided by Gerd Sutter (University of Munich),propagated in BHK-21 (baby hamster kidney cell, ATCC CCL-10) cells, butboth materials are commercially and/or publicly available. Viruses werepurified through a 36% sucrose cushion. B SC40 cells were maintained inDulbecco's modified Eagle's medium (DMEM, can be purchased from LifeTechnologies, Cat#11965-092) supplemented with 5% fetal bovine serum(FBS), penicillin (100 units/ml), and streptomycin (100 μg/ml). BHK-21were cultured in Eagle's Minimal Essential Medium (Eagle's MEM, can bepurchased from Life Technologies, Cat#11095-080) containing 10% FBS, 0.1mM nonessential amino acids (NEAA), and 50 mg/ml gentamycin. The murinemelanoma cell line B16-F10 was originally obtained from I. Fidler (MDAnderson Cancer Center). B16-F10 cells were maintained in RPMI 1640medium supplemented with 10% FBS, 100 Units/ml penicillin, 100 μg/mlstreptomycin, 0.1 mM NEAA, 2 mM L-glutamine, 1 mM sodium pyruvate, and10 mM HEPES buffer.

All cells were grown at 37.0 in a 5% CO2 incubator.

Heat-MVA was generated by incubating purified MVA virus at 55° C. for 1hour. For generation of UV-MVA, MVA was UV irradiated in a Stratalinker1800 UV cross-linker (Stratagene) with a 365 nm UV lamp for 15 min. Mice

Female C57BL/6J mice between 6 and 10 weeks of age were purchased fromthe Jackson Laboratory (Stock #000664) and were used for the preparationof bone marrow-derived dendritic cells and for in vivo experiments.These mice were maintained in the animal facility at the Sloan KetteringInstitute. All procedures were performed in strict accordance with therecommendations in the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animalsof the National Institute of Health. The protocol was approved by theCommittee on the Ethics of Animal Experiments of Sloan-Kettering CancerInstitute. cGAS^(−/−), IRF7^(−/−), IRF5^(−/−), Batf3^(−/−), andSTING^(Gt/Gt) mice were generated in the laboratories of Drs. ZhijianChen (University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center; cGAS^(−/−)),Tadatsugu Taniguchi (University of Tokyo; IRF3^(−/−) and IRF7^(−/−)),Tak Mak (University of Toronto; IRF5^(−/−)); Kenneth Murphy (WashingtonUniversity; Batf3^(−/−)), and Russell Vance (University of California,Berkeley; STING^(Gt/Gt)). IFNAR1^(−/−) mice were provided by Dr. EricPamer (Sloan Kettering Institute); the mice were purchased from B&KUniversal and were backcrossed with C57BL/6 mice for more than sixgenerations. IRF5^(−/−) mice were backcrossed to C57BL/6J mice for atleast six generations in Dr. Paula M. Pitha's laboratory before theywere transferred to Sloan Kettering Institute.

Commercial sources for the foregoing animals are as follows:

Mice Source Commercial cGAS^(−/−) Zhijian Jackson Stock# 026554 ChenSTING^(Gt/Gt) Russell Jackson stock# 017537 Vance IRF3^(−/−) T.Taniguchi lab Taniguchiwww2.brc.riken.jp/lab/animal/detail.php?reg_no=RBRC00858 IRF7^(−/−) T.Taniguchi lab Taniguchiwww2.brc.riken.jp/lab/animal/detail.php?brc_no=RBRC01420 IRF5^(−/−) TakMak Jackson stock# 017311 Batf3^(−/−) Kenneth Jackson stock# 013755Murphy IFNAR1^(−/−) Eric Jackson stock# 010830 Pamer

Generation of Bone Marrow-Derived Dendritic Cells

The bone marrow cells from the tibia and femur of mice were collected byfirst removing muscles from the bones, and then flushing the cells outusing 0.5 cc U-100 insulin syringes (Becton Dickinson) with RPMI with10% FCS. After centrifugation, cells were re-suspended in ACK LysingBuffer (Lonza) for red blood cells lysis by incubating the cells on icefor 1-3 min. Cells were then collected, re-suspended in fresh medium,and filtered through a 40-μm cell strainer (BD Biosciences). The numberof cells was counted. For the generation of GM-CSF-BMDCs, the bonemarrow cells (5 million cells in each 15 cm cell culture dish) werecultured in CM in the presence of GM-CSF (30 ng/ml, produced by theMonoclonal Antibody Core facility at the Sloan Kettering Institute) for10-12 days. CM is RPMI 1640 medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovineserum (FBS), 100 Units/ml penicillin, 100 μg/ml streptomycin, 0.1 mMessential and nonessential amino acids, 2 mM L-glutamine, 1 mM sodiumpyruvate, and 10 mM HEPES buffer. Cells were fed every 2 days byreplacing 50% of the old medium with fresh medium and re-plated every3-4 days to remove adherent cells. Only non-adherent cells were used forexperiments.

RNA Isolation and Real-Time PCR

RNA was extracted from whole-cell lysates with an RNeasy Mini kit(Qiagen) and was reverse transcribed with a First Strand cDNA synthesiskit (Fermentas). Quantitative real-time PCR was performed in triplicatewith SYBR Green PCR Mater Mix (Life Technologies) and Applied Biosystems7500 Real-time PCR Instrument (Life Technologies) using gene-specificprimers. Relative expression was normalized to the levels ofglyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH).

The following primers were used for real-time PCR:

(SEQ ID NO: 1) IFNA4 forward: 5′-CCTGTGTGATGCAGGAACC-3′, (SEQ ID NO: 2IFNA4 reverse: 5′-TCACCTCCCAGGCACAGA-3′;  (SEQ ID NO: 3) IFNB forward:5′-TGGAGATGACGGAGAAGATG-3′, (SEQ ID NO: 4) IFNB reverse:5′-TTGGATGGCAAAGGCAGT-3′; (SEQ ID NO: 5) GAPDH forward:5′-ATCAAGAAGGTGGTGAAGCA-3′, (SEQ ID NO: 6) GAPDH reverse:5′-AGACAACCTGGTCCTCAGTGT-3.Relative expression was normalized to the levels ofglyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH).

Cytokine Assays

Cells were infected with various viruses at a MOI of 10 for 1 h or mockinfected. The inoculum was removed and the cells were washed with PBStwice and incubated with fresh medium. Supernatants were collected atvarious times post infection. Cytokine levels were measured by usingenzyme-linked immunosorbent essay (ELISA) kits for IFN-α/β (PBLBiomedical Laboratories), IL-6, CCL4, and CCLS (R & D systems).

Western Blot Analysis

BMDCs (1×10⁶) from WT and KO mice were infected with MVA at a MOI(multiplicity of infection) of 10 or an equivalent amount of Heat-MVA,or UV-MVA. At various times post-infection, the medium was removed andcells were collected. Whole-cell lysates were prepared. Equal amounts ofproteins were subjected to sodium dodecyl sulfate-polyacrylamide gelelectrophoresis and the polypeptides were transferred to anitrocellulose membrane. Phosphorylation of IRF3 was determined using arabbit polyclonal antibody specific for phosphoserine-396 of IRF3 (CellSignaling). The level of IRF3 was determined using a rabbit polyclonalantibody against IRF3 (Cell Signaling). Anti-STING antibodies werepurchased from Cell Signaling. Vaccinia E3 protein level was determinedby using anti-E3 monoclonal antibody (MAb 3015B2) kindly provided by Dr.Stuart N. Isaacs (University of Pennsylvania) [85].Anti-glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GADPH) or anti-β-actinantibodies (Cell Signaling) were used as loading controls.

B16-F10 melanoma cells were infected with MVA at a MOI of 10 or with anequivalent amount of Heat-MVA. Cell lysates were collected at varioustimes post infection. Western blot analysis was performed usinganti-phospho-IRF3, anti-IRF3, and anti-GAPDH antibodies as describedabove.

Unilateral Intradermal Tumor implantation and Intratumoral Injectionwith Viruses in the Presence or Absence of Systemic Administration ofImmune Checkpoint Blockade

B16-F10 melanoma (1×10⁵ cells in a volume of 50 μl) were implantedintradermally into the shaved skin on the right flank of STING^(Gt/Gt),or Batf3^(−/−), or age-matched WT C57BL/6J mice. After 10 to 12 dayspost implantation, tumor sizes were measured and tumors that are 3 mm indiameter or larger will be injected with Heat-MVA (equivalent to 2×10⁷pfu of MVA in a volume of 50 μl) or PBS when the mice were underanesthesia. Viruses were injected weekly or twice weekly as specified ineach experiment. Mice were monitored daily and tumor sizes were measuredtwice a week. Tumor volumes were calculated according the followingformula: l (length)×w (width)×h(height)/2. Mice were euthanized forsigns of distress or when the diameter of the tumor reached 10 mm. Serumwere collected when the mice were euthanized.

To evaluate the combination of Heat-MVA with immune checkpoint blockade,we treated the mice either with intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA orPBS in the presence or absence of anti-CTLA-4 antibody (100 μg in avolume of 100 μl) delivered intraperitoneally. The mice received virusand antibodies every 3-4 days (twice per week). The animals weremonitored daily, and measured for tumor size every 3 days. Tumor volumeswere calculated according the following formula: l (length)×w(width)×h(height)/2. Mice were euthanized for signs of distress or whenthe diameter of the tumor reached 10 mm.

In some cases, 1×10⁵ MC38 colon adenocarcinoma cells were implantedintradermally on the right flank of shave mice. After 7 days, tumorswere injected with either PBS, Heat-MVA, or UV-MVA at the same dose asdescribed above twice weekly. The animals were monitored daily, andmeasured for tumor size every 3 days. Tumor volumes were calculatedaccording the following formula: l (length)×w (width)×h(height)/2. Micewere euthanized for signs of distress or when the diameter of the tumorreached 10 mm.

Tumor Challenge to Assess the Development of Systemic Antitumor Immunity

For the B16-F10 murine melanoma model, tumors were implanted byinjection of 1×10⁵ cells (in a volume of 50 μl) on the right flankintradermally and treated with intratumoral delivery of PBS or Heat-MVA(an equivalent of heat-inactivated 2×10⁷ pfu of MVA in a volume of 50μl). The mice were monitored for tumor growth and survival for 30-80days. The survived mice were rechallenged with either intradermallydelivery of a lethal dose of B16-F10 (1×10⁵ cells) at the contralateralside. Mice were monitored for 30-80 days for tumor growth.Alternatively, they were challenged by intravenous delivery of a lethaldose of B16-F10 (1×10⁵ cells) and then euthanized at 3 weeks postrechallenge to evaluate the presence of tumors on the surface of lungs.

For the MC38 murine colon adenocarcinoma model, tumors were implanted byinjection of 1×10⁵ cells in the right flank intradermally and treatedwith intratumoral delivery of PBS, Heat-MVA, or UV-MVA (an equivalent ofheat- or UV-inactivated 2×10⁷ pfu of MVA). The mice were monitored fortumor growth and survival for 60 days. The survived mice wererechallenged with either intradermally delivery of a lethal dose ofB16-F10 (1×10⁵ cells) at the contralateral side. Mice were monitored for60 days for tumor growth.

T Cell Depletion Experiment

B16-F10 murine melanoma cells (1×10⁵ cells in a volume of 50 μl) wereimplanted intradermally into the right flank of shaved WT C57B/6 mice at6-8 weeks of age. At 8 days post tumor implantation, the tumors wereinjected with either Heat-MVA (an equivalent dose of 2×10⁷ pfu of MVA)or PBS twice weekly. Depletion antibodies for CD4⁺, CD8⁺ and NK cells(200 μg of GK1.5, 2.43, and PK136) (Monoclonal Antibody Core Facility,MSKCC) (ref, Avogadri et al., PloS One 2010) were injectedintraperitoneally twice weekly starting one day prior to viralinjection, and they were used until the animals either died, or wereeuthanized, or were completely clear of tumors. Mice were monitoreddaily and tumor sizes were measured. The depletion of targeted immunecells was validated by FACS of peripheral blood of mice after 4 doses ofantibodies.

Bilateral Tumor Implantation Model and Intratumoral Injection withViruses in the Presence or Absence of Systemic or IntratumoralAdministration of Immune Checkpoint Blockade

Briefly, B16-F10 melanoma cells were implanted intradermally to the leftand right flanks of C57B/6 mice (5×10⁵ to the right flank and 1×10⁵ tothe left flank). 8 days after tumor implantation, we intratumorallyinject 2×10⁷ pfu of MVA or an equivalent amount of Heat-MVA to thelarger tumors on the right flank. The tumor sizes were measured and thetumors were injected twice a week. The survival of mice was monitored.

In some experiments, MC38 colon adenocarcinoma cells were implantedintradermally to the left and right flanks of C57B/6 mice (5×10⁵ to theright flank and 1×10⁵ to the left flank).

In some experiments, STING^(Gt/Gt), Batf3^(−/−) mice and WT age-matchedcontrols were used for bilateral B16-F10 melanoma implantation, andtreated with PBS or Heat-MVA to the larger tumors on the right flank ofthe mice.

In some experiments, the mice with bilateral tumors were treated withintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA to the larger tumors on the rightflank and intraperitoneal delivery of immune checkpoint blockadeantibodies, including anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, or anti-PD-L1.

In some experiments, the mice with bilateral tumors were treated withintratumoral injection of both Heat-MVA and anti-CTLA-4 antibody (withone tenth of dose of as used for intraperitoneal delivery) to the largertumors on the right flank. The sizes of both injected and non-injectedtumors were measured and the survival of the mice was monitored.

Flow Cytometry Analysis of DC Maturation

For DC maturation analysis, BMDCs were generated from WT andSTING^(Gt/Gt) mice and infected with MVA at a MOI of 10 or with anequivalent amount of Heat-MVA. Cell were collected at 14 h postinfection and were then fixed with Fix Buffer I (BD Biosciences) for 15min at 37° C. Cells were washed, permeabilized with PermBuffer (BDBiosciences) for 30 min on ice, and stained with antibodies against MHCClass I, CD40, CD86, and CD80 for 30 min. Cells were analyzed using theLSRII Flow cytometer (BD Biosciences). Data were analyzed with FlowJosoftware (Treestar).

Flow Cytometry Analysis of Tumor Infiltrating Immune Cells

To analyze immune cell phenotypes and characteristics in the tumors ortumor draining lymph nodes, we generated cell suspensions prior to FACSanalysis according to the following protocol (Zamarin et al., 2014).First we isolated injected and/or non-injected tumors using forceps andsurgical scissors three days post second treatment and 7 days post firsttreatment with PBS, MVA or Heat-MVA. The tumors were then weighed.Tumors or tumor draining lymph nodes were minced prior to incubationwith Liberase (1.67 Wunsch U/ml) and DNase (0.2 mg/ml) for 30 minutes at37° C. Cell suspensions were generated by repeated pipetting, filteredthrough a 70-μm nylon filter, and then washed with complete RPMI priorto Ficoll purification to remove dead cells. Cells were processed forsurface labeling with anti-CD3, CD45, CD4, and CD8 antibodies. Livecells are distinguished from dead cells by using fixable dye eFluor506(eBioscience). They were further permeabilized using FoxP3 fixation andpermeabilization kit (eBioscience), and stained for Ki-67, FoxP3, andGranzyme B. Data were acquired using the LSRII Flow cytometer (BDBiosciences). Data were analyzed with FlowJo software (Treestar).

Anti-Melanoma and Anti-Viral Antibody Measurement by ELISA

To determine anti-B16 melanoma antibody concentrations in the serum ofthe mice, 5×10⁴ B16-F10 cells in 100 μl medium/well were add to 96 wellculture plate and incubated overnight at 37° C. The plates were washedtwice with PBST. Cells were treated with 10% buffered formalin (125 μl)and fixed for 15 min at room temperature. The plates were then washedthree times with PBS. After blocking with PBS with 1% BSA (250 μl) atroom temperature for 1 h, mouse serum diluted in PBS with 1% BSA (1:500)was added at 100 μl/well. The plate was washed with PBST five times.Incubate for 1 hr at 37° C. Then horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugatedanti-mouse IgG diluted in PBS with 1% BSA (1:2000) was added to theplate and incubated for 1 hr at 37° C. The plate was washed with PBSfive times and incubated with substrate 3,3′,5,5′-TetramethylbenzidineTMB (100 μl/well) at room temperature for 10 min. The reaction wasterminated by adding sulfuric acid (2N, 50 μl/well). The optical densityof each well was determined by using a microplate reader set to 450 nm.

To determine anti-vaccinia viral antibody concentrations in the serum ofthe mice, Heat-MVA (10 μg/ml) in 100 μl PBS/well were added to 96 wellculture plate and incubated overnight at 37° C. The plates were washedtwice with PBST. After blocking with PBS with 1% BSA (250 μl) at roomtemperature for 1 h, mouse serum diluted in PBS with 1% BSA (1:200) wasadded at 100 μl/well. The rest of the detection protocol is the same asstated above.

Reagents

The commercial sources for reagents were as follows: CpGoligodeoxynucleotide ODN2216 (Invitrogen); We used the followingantibodies. Therapeutic anti-CTLA4 (clone 9H10 and 9D9), anti-PD1 (cloneRMP1-14) were purchased from BioXcell; Antibodies used for flowcytometry were purchased from eBioscience (CD45.2 Alexa Fluor 700, CD3PE-Cy7, CD4 APC-efluor780, CD8 PerCP-efluor710, FOXP3 Alexa Fluor 700,MHC Class I APC, CD40 APC, CD80 APC, CD86 APC), Invitrogen (CD4 QDot605, Granzyme B PE-Texas Red, Granzyme B APC), BD Pharmingen(Ki-67-Alexa Fluor 488).

Statistics

Two-tailed unpaired Student's t test was used for comparisons of twogroups in the studies. Survival data were analyzed by log-rank(Mantel-Cox) test. The p values deemed significant are indicated in thefigures as follows: *, p<0.05; **, p<0.01; ***, p<0.001; ****, p<0.0001.

Example 1 Heat-Inactivated MVA Induces Higher Levels of type I IFNProduction in Murine cDCs than MVA

To test whether heat-inactivation of MVA (Heat-MVA) would result inhigher levels of type I IFN induction than MVA, MVA was incubated at 55°C. for 1 h, which resulted in the reduction of infectivity by 1000-fold.Bone marrow-derived dendritic cells were cultured in the presence ofGM-CSF (GM-CSF-BMDCs or cDCs) and infected with either MVA at amultiplicity of infection (MOI) of 10 or with an equivalent amount ofHeat-MVA. Cells were harvested at 6 h post infection and quantitativereal-time PCR analysis of RNA isolated from infected cells andmock-infected cells was performed. It was found that MVA infection ofcDCs increased IFNA4 and IFNB mRNA levels by 4.8-fold and 148-fold,respectively, compared mock-infected cells. By contrast, infection ofHeat-MVA dramatically increased IFNA4 and IFNB mRNA levels by 22.4-foldand 607-fold, respectively (FIG. 1A). These results indicate thatHeat-MVA is a stronger inducer of IFNA4 and IFNB gene expression thanMVA (***, p<0.001).

To assess the kinetics of induction of type I IFN secretion by Heat-MVAor MVA-infected cDCs, supernatants were collected at various times (0,4, 8, 16, and 22 hours) post Heat-MVA or MVA infection, and the levelsof secreted IFN-α and IFN-β were determined by ELISA. Heat-MVA stronglyinduced both IFN-α (1650 pg/ml) and IFN-β (1975 pg/ml) at 8 hpost-infection, which were 10-fold and 6-fold higher than those inducedby MVA at the same time point. Whereas MVA-induced IFN-α and IFN-βcontinued to rise between 8 h and 22 h post infection, Heat-MVA inducedIFN-α levels increased modestly during this time frame, while Heat-MVAinduced IFN-β peaked at 8 h post infection and leveled off thereafter(FIG. 1B). Western blot analysis showed that E3 protein, whichattenuates innate immune responses, was not produced in Heat-MVAinfected cDCs, but was expressed in MVA-infected cells (FIG. 1C).Furthermore, Heat-MVA triggered higher levels of IRF3 phosphorylationthan MVA at 4 and 8 h post infection (FIG. 1C). Taken together, theseresults demonstrate that Heat-MVA is a stronger inducer of type I IFNproduction in cDCs than MVA.

Example 2 Heat-MVA-Induced Type I IFN Production is Dependent on theCytosolic DNA-Sensing Pathway Mediated by cGAS/STING, and TranscriptionFactors IRF3/IRF7, and IFNAR1

To test whether Heat-MVA infection of cDCs triggers type I IFN inductionvia the cytosolic DNA-sensing pathway mediated by the cytosolic DNAsensor cGAS (cyclic GMP-AMP synthase) [62, 63], and its adaptor STING[59, 69], cDCs were generated from cGAS^(−/−) [86] mice and age-matchedWT controls and infected with Heat-MVA. Using quantitative real-time PCRanalysis, it was found that Heat-MVA-induced IFNA4 and IFNB geneexpression at 6 h post infection were both diminished in cGAS-deficientcells (FIGS. 2A, 2B). Analysis of supernatants collected at 22 h postinfection also showed that Heat-MVA-induced IFN-α/β secretion wasabolished in cGAS-deficient cells (FIGS. 2A, 2B).

STING is a critical adaptor for the cytosolic DNA-sensing pathway [59,69, 87, 88]. cDCs were also generated from STING^(Gt/Gt) mice, whichlack functional STING [89]. It was found that Heat-MVA induced type IIFN gene expression and that IFN-α/β secretion from the cDCs is alsodependent on STING (FIG. 2C, D). Western blot analysis demonstrated thatHeat-MVA induced phosphorylation of IRF3 at ser-396 at 4 and 8 h postinfection, which was abolished in cGAS or STING-deficient cells (FIG.2E, F). To test whether heat-MVA infection triggers DC maturation viathe cytosolic DNA-sensing pathway, cDCs from STING^(Gt/Gt) mice andage-matched WT controls were infected with Heat-MVA. Cells werecollected at 14 h post infection and stained for DC activation marker,including MEW class I (MHO) CD40, CD86, and CD80. Heat-MVA infectionmarkedly induced the expression of CD40 and CD86, and mildly increasedthe expression of MHC I and CD80 in WT cells (FIG. 2G). However, theexpression of the activation markers was significantly reduced inSTING-deficient cells (FIG. 2G). These results indicate that Heat-MVAinduction of DC maturation is largely mediated through the cytosolicDNA-sensing pathway. Our results imply that the viral DNAs from MVA andHeat-MVA are released to the cytosol of infected cDCs and are detectedby the cytosolic DNA sensor cGAS, which in turn generates the secondmessenger cGAMP, resulting in the activation of STING and downstreamsignaling pathways.

To test whether Heat-MVA-induction of type I IFN requires IRF3, IRF5 andIRF7, in addition to cGAS and STING, cDC were generated from IRF3^(−/−),IRF7^(−/−) and age-matched WT mice, and infected with Heat-MVA.Heat-MVA-induced IFNA4 gene expression, and IFN-a protein production wasdependent on IRF3 and IRF7, but independent of IRF5 (FIG. 3A, B). Inaddition, Heat-MVA-induced IFNB gene expression, and similarly to IFN-αsecretion, IFN-β protein secretion was dependent on IRF3 and IRF7 butnot IRF5 (FIG. 3A, B). Heat-MVA-induced IFNB gene expression and IFN-βproduction were reduced by 74% and 67%, respectively, in IRF7-deficientcells (FIG. 3A, B). Heat-MVA-induced IFNA4 gene expression and IFN-αprotein secretion were dependent on IFNAR1, whereas Heat-MVA-inducedIFNB gene expression and IFN-β secretion were reduced by 82% and 62%,respectively, in IFNAR1-deficient cells (FIG. 3C, D). These resultsindicate that Heat-MVA-induced type I IFN induction requirestranscriptional factors IRF3 and IRF7, as well as the Type I IFNpositive feedback loop mediated by IFNAR1.

Example 3 Heat MVA Induces Higher Levels of Type I IFN than MVA In Vivo

To test whether Heat-MVA induces higher levels of type I IFN than MVA invivo, Heat-MVA or MVA were inoculated into C57B/6 mice via tail veininjection, and serum was collected at 6 h post-infection. The levels ofboth IFN-α and IFN-β in the serum were significantly higher inHeat-MVA-treated mice than in MVA-treated mice (FIG. 4A) (***, p<0.001).These results indicate that heat-MVA not only induces higher levels oftype I IFN than MVA in cultured cDCs, but it also induces higher levelsof type I IFN than MVA in vivo.

Example 4 Heat MVA Triggers Type I IFN Production In Vivo in aSTING/IRF3/IRF7-Dependent Manner

To test whether Heat-MVA in vivo induction of type I IFN requiresIFNAR1, intravenous (IV) inoculation of purified Heat-MVA via tail veininjection of IFNAR1^(−/−) and WT age-matched control mice was performed.Heat-MVA infection of WT mice induced IFN-α and IFN-β production to thelevels of 2256 pg/ml and 1901 pg/ml, which was reduced by 60% and 35%,respectively, in IFNAR1^(−/−) mice (FIG. 4B) (**,p<0.01; ***, p<0.001).

Heat-MVA-induced IFN-α secretion was reduced by 89% in STING^(Gt/Gt)mice compared with WT controls, whereas Heat-MVA-induced IFN-β secretionwas abolished in STING^(Gt/Gt) mice (FIG. 4C), indicating thatHeat-MVA-induced type I IFN production in vivo is also dependent onSTING. Furthermore, it was found that Heat-MVA-induced IFN-α was reducedby 74% in IRF3^(−/−) mice compared with WT controls, whereasHeat-MVA-induced IFN-β was reduced by 98% in IRF3^(−/−) mice.Heat-MVA-induced IFN-α and IFN-β secretions were diminished inIRF7^(−/−) mice (FIG. 4C). These results indicate that Heat-MVA-inducedtype I IFN in vivo requires STING and IRF3/IRF7.

Example 5 Heat MVA infection of B16-F10 Melanoma Cells Induces theProduction of Type I IFN and Proinflammatory Cytokines and Chemokines

To test whether Heat-MVA infection of tumor cells triggers innate immuneresponses, B16-F10 melanoma cells were infected with MVA at an MOI of10, or with equivalent amounts of Heat-MVA, and cells were collected at6 h post infection and supernatants were collected at 22 h postinfection. Quantitative real-time PCR analysis showed that Heat-MVAinfection of B16-F10 cells induced higher levels of Ifna4, Ifnb, Ccl5,and Il6 gene expression than MVA (FIG. 5A). ELISA analysis showed thatHeat-MVA induced higher levels of IFN-α, IFN-β, CCLS, and IL-6 proteinsecretion in B16-F10 cells than MVA (FIG. 5B). Western blot analysisdemonstrated that Heat-MVA infection induces higher levels ofphosphorylation of IRF3 in B16-F10 melanoma cells than MVA (FIG. 5C).Furthermore, Heat-MVA infection induced the expression of MHC Class Imolecule expression on B16 cells, whereas MVA infection failed to do so.These results suggest that Heat-MVA infection of B16 cells not onlyinduces innate immune responses against tumor cells through the releaseof type I IFN and proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines, but alsochanges (enhances) the immunogenicity of the tumors through theinduction of MHC Class I molecules on the tumor cells.

Example 6 55° C. for 1 h is an Optimal Condition to Inactivate MVA

To evaluate whether 55° C. is the optimal temperature for inactivatingMVA, we incubated MVA at various different temperatures, including, 45°C., 50° C., 55° C., 60° C., and 65° C., for one hour. cDCs from WT micewere infected with these virus preparations and supernatants werecollected at 22 h post infection. The concentrations of secreted IFN-αand IFN-β were measured by ELISA. We found that infection with MVAinactivated at 55° C. for one hour induced the highest levels of IFN-αand IFN-β secretion from cDCs (FIG. 6A, B).

Example 7 Intratumoral Injection of Heat MVA Leads to Tumor Eradicationand Systemic Anti-Tumoral Immunity in a Murine Transplantable B16-F 10Melanoma Model

The transplantable in vivo B16-F10 melanoma model involves theintradermal implantation of murine B16-F10 melanoma cells (1×10⁵) on oneside of the flank of C57B/6 mice. Ten days following tumor implantation,when the tumors were approximately 3 mm in diameter, Heat-MVA (with anequivalent of 2×10⁷ pfu of MVA) or PBS were injected to the tumorsweekly. Intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA resulted in tumor eradicationand 100% survival of mice (FIG. 7A, B), demonstrating excellenttherapeutic efficacy. By contrast, all of the mice with intratumoralinjection of PBS had continued tumor growth and were euthanized at 19and 21 days post tumor implantation (FIG. 7A, B).

To test whether mice whose tumors were eradicated after intratumoralinjection of Heat-MVA developed systemic anti-tumoral immunity, animalswere challenged by intradermal implantation of a lethal dose of B16melanoma cells (1×10⁵) to the contralateral side 8 weeks after theeradication of initial tumors. Naïve mice that were never exposed to B16melanoma cells or heat-MVA were used as a control. Animals were followedfor 70 days after tumor challenge. 90% of heat-MVA-treated mice survivedthe tumor challenge, whereas all of the naïve mice developed growingtumors and were eventually euthanized (FIG. 7C). To test whetherHeat-MVA-treated mice developed systemic anti-tumor immunity at adifferent organ, analogous to metastasis, we tested whetherHeat-MVA-treated mice can reject tumor challenge via intravenousdelivery of B16-F10 melanoma cells. Both naïve mice and Heat-MVA-treatedmice received 1×10⁵ B16-F10 cells through intravenous delivery. Micewere euthanized at 3-week post tumor challenge. The lungs of the micewere collected and fixed in formalin containing solutions. The tumors onthe surface of the lungs were visualized under a dissecting microscopeand counted. We found that whereas all of the naïve mice developedtumors with an average of 58 visualized on the surface of the lungs,only one out of 10 Heat-MVA-treated mouse developed 2 tumor foci visibleunder the microscope (FIG. 7D, ****, p<0.0001). Collectively, theseresults indicate that intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA leads both toeradication of injected tumors and to the development of systemicantitumoral immunity. These results imply that intratumoral injection ofHeat-MVA can elicit a strong tumor vaccine effect, possibly throughenhanced tumor antigen presentation and the activation of tumor-specificT cells.

Example 8 Heat MVA Leads to Immunological Changes in the TumorMicroenvironment

To investigate the immunologic changes within the tumors induced byintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA, tumors were harvested at 3 days postintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA or PBS and the immune cellinfiltrates were analyzed by FACS. The percentage of CD3⁺CD45⁺ T cellsof live cells within the tumors increased from 6.5% in the PBS-treatedtumors to 19.5% in the Heat-MVA-treated tumors (P=0.0002; FIG. 8A, G).An increase in the percentage of CD8⁺ T cells that express Granzyme B(i.e. expressing the cytotoxic phenotype) was also observed within thetumors, and it ranged from 47.9% in PBS-treated tumors to 92.8% inHeat-MVA-treated tumors (P<0.0001; FIG. 8B, H). The percentage ofKi-67⁺CD8⁺ T cells (i.e., proliferating CD8⁺ T cells) increased from51.2% to 71.7% (P=0.0008; FIG. 8C, I). Similar changes were observed forCD4⁺ T cells within the tumors treated with Heat-MVA compared with thosetreated with PBS; the percentage of Granzyme B⁺CD4⁺ T cells (i.e.,activated T helper cells) rose dramatically from 3% in PBS-treatedtumors to 57% in Heat-MVA-treated tumors (P=0.0002; FIG. 8D, J).Additionally, there was an increase in the percentage of Ki-67⁺CD4⁺ Tcells (i.e. proliferating CD4⁺ T cells) from 37.5% in PBS-treated tumorsto 79% in Heat-MVA-treated tumors (P<0.0001; FIG. 8E and K). Bycontrast, the percentage of Foxp3⁺CD4⁺ T cells (i.e., regulatory CD4⁺ Tcells) decreased from 34.7% in PBS-treated tumors to 9.1% inHeat-MVA-treated tumors (P<0.0001; FIG. 8F, N). These results indicatethat intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA dramatically upregulates immuneresponses in the tumor microenvironment, including proliferation andactivation of helper CD4⁺, cytotoxic CD4⁺ (collectively, “effector Tcells”) and cytotoxic CD8⁺ T cells and a concomitant reduction of CD4⁺regulatory T cells within the tumors. Taken together with the results ofExample 8, these results indicate that intratumoral injection ofHeat-MVA profoundly alters the tumor immune suppressive microenvironmentto facilitate the development of antitumor immunity.

Example 9 Heat MVA Also Induces Immunological Changes in theTumor-Draining Lymph Nodes (TDLNs)

To test whether intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA causes immunologicalchanges in TDLNs, TDLNs were isolated from Heat-MVA-treated orPBS-treated mice and analyzed by FACS. The percentage of Granzyme B⁺CD8⁺T cells in TDLNs increased from 0.15% in mice treated with PBS to 3.04%in mice treated with Heat-MVA (P<0.0001; FIG. 9A and E). In addition,the percentage of Ki-67⁺CD8⁺ T cells increased from 7.2% in mice treatedwith PBS to 17% in mice treated with Heat-MVA (P=0.0003; FIG. 9C, F).These results indicate that there are more activated and replicatingCD8⁺ T cells in the TDLNs in Heat-MVA-treated mice than in PBS-treatedmice. Similar increase of activated and replicating CD4⁺ T cells wasalso observed in Heat-MVA-treated mice compared with PBS-treated mice.The percentage of Granzyme B⁺CD4⁺ T cells in TDLNs increased from 0.25%in PBS-treated mice to 0.77% in Heat-MVA-treated mice (P=0.002; FIG. 9B,G), and the percentage of Ki-67⁺CD4⁺ T cells in TDLNs increased from10.6% in PBS-treated mice to 18.4% in Heat-MVA-treated mice (P=0.002;FIG. 9D, H). Taken together, these results indicate that intratumoralinjection of Heat-MVA leads to the activation and proliferation of bothCD8⁺ and CD4⁺ T cells not only within the tumor but also in thecirculation.

Example 10 Intratumoral Injection of Heat-MVA is Less Effective inEradicating B16 Melanomas in STING-Deficient Mice or Batf3-DeficientMice Compared with Wild-Type Controls

Recent studies have shown that the STING-mediated cytosolic DNA-sensingpathway plays a role in spontaneous T cell responses against tumors aswell as in radiation-induced antitumoral immunity [7, 8, 90]. BATF3 is atranscription factor that is critical for the development of CD8a⁺lineage DCs, which play an important role in cross-presentation of viraland tumor antigens [91, 92]. Batf3-deficient mice were unable to rejecthighly immunogenic tumors [91]. To test whether STING or Batf3 plays arole in Heat-MVA-mediated tumor clearance, we implanted B16-F10 melanomacells intradermally into the right flank of WT C57B/6, STING^(Gt/Gt), orBatf3^(−/−) mice. At 11 days post tumor implantation, the tumors wereinjected with either Heat-MVA (an equivalent dose of 2×10⁷ pfu) or PBSon a weekly basis as indicated (FIG. 10A and B). We found that 100% ofthe WT mice that had tumors treated with Heat-MVA survived with verylittle if any residual tumor, whereas all of the WT mice treated withPBS died (median survival of 24 days) (FIG. 10A and B). We also observedthat while only 7.7% of STING-deficient mice treated with Heat-MVAsurvived, all of the STING-deficient mice treated with PBS died. Thedifferences in survival between WT and STING^(Gt/Gt) mice after Heat-MVAtreatment were statistically significant (P<0.0001) (FIG. 10A and B).Heat-MVA treatment in STING^(Gt/Gt) mice extended median survival from21 days to 28 days (P<0.0001) (FIG. 10A and B). More strikingly, all ofthe Batf3^(−/−) mice died regardless of whether they were treated withHeat-MVA or PBS. However, Heat-MVA treatment in Batf3^(−/−) miceextended the median survival days from 21 to 30 days (P=0.0025) (FIG.10A and B). These results demonstrate that both the STING-mediatedcytosolic DNA-sensing pathway and CD8α⁺DCs are required forHeat-MVA-induced antitumor effect.

Example 11 CD8+ T Cells are Required for Heat-MVA-Induced AntitumorEffects

To determine which immune cell type is required for the therapeuticeffect of Heat-MVA, we performed an antibody depletion experiment.Briefly, we implanted B16-F10 melanoma cells (2×10⁵) intradermally intothe right flank of WT C57B/6 mice. At 8 days post tumor implantation,the tumors were injected with either Heat-MVA (an equivalent dose of2×10⁷ pfu) or PBS twice weekly basis as indicated (FIG. 10A). Depletionantibodies for CD4⁺, CD8⁺ and NK cells (200 μg of GK1.5, 2.43, andPK136) were injected intraperitoneally twice a week, starting one dayprior to viral injection (FIG. 11A). We found that whereas intratumoraldelivery of Heat-MVA leads to efficient tumor eradication, depletion ofCD8⁺ T cells leads to the dramatic loss of therapeutic efficacy ofHeat-MVA (**** , P<0.0001) (FIG. 11B, C, D, E). Depletion of CD4⁺ andNK/NKT cells results in only partial loss of therapeutic efficacy ofHeat-MVA (FIG. 11F, G). These results indicate that CD8⁺ T cells arerequired for the antitumor effects elicited by Heat-MVA, whereas CD4⁺and NK/NKT cells also contribute to the antitumor effects. The role ofCD4⁺ T cells in antitumor effect was further demonstrated by the lack ofprotection against tumor challenge in mice successfully treated withHeat-MVA in the presence of CD4-depleting antibody (FIG. 11H-I). Bycontrast, mice successfully treated with Heat-MVA in the presence orabsence of NK/NKT-depleting antibody efficiently rejected tumorchallenge (FIG. 11H-I). We conclude that although CD4⁺ T cells are notabsolutely required for eradicating Heat-MVA-injected tumor, but theyare critical for the development of anti-tumor adaptive immunity,possibly for the generation of antitumor antibodies. Taken together withExample 8, 9, 10, and 11, we surmise that intratumoral delivery ofHeat-MVA leads to induction of type I IFN in immune cells and tumorcells, which leads to the activation of CD103⁺ dendritic cells,resulting in tumor antigen cross-presentation to CD8⁺ T cells within thetumors and in the circulation, as well as the generation of adaptiveantitumor immunity.

Example 12 Both STING-Mediated Cytosolic DNA-Sensing Pathway andCD103⁺DCs are Required for the Induction of Anti-Melanoma Antibody byHeat MVA

Anti-tumor antibody production is an important aspect of adaptiveimmunity. To test whether Heat-MVA induces anti-melanoma antibodyproduction, we performed ELISA to determine the serum concentration ofanti-B16 melanoma antibodies in mice treated with Heat-MVA ormock-treated. We found that only Heat-MVA treated mice producedanti-melanoma antibodies (FIG. 12A). This induction is abolished inSTING or Batf3-deficient mice (FIG. 12A). By contrast, the production ofantiviral antibodies is not dependent on either STING or Batf3 (FIG.12B). These results suggest that the processes that facilitate tumor andviral antigen recognition in this animal model are probably different.From example 11, we know that CD8+ T cells are critical for tumorkilling at the injected tumors, and therefore are important for therelease of tumor antigens, which can be processed by B cells to generateantigen-specific antibodies in the presence of helper CD4⁺ T cells. Wetherefore hypothesize that in the Batf3-deficient mice, both anti-tumorCD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells are lacking, which contribute to the failure ofproduction of anti-melanoma antibodies.

Example 13 The Combination of Intratumoral Injection of Heat MVA withIntraperitoneal Delivery of Anti-CTLA-4 Antibody Leads to SynergisticAntitumor Effects in a Unilateral Melanoma Implantation Model

To investigate whether intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA has theability to enhance therapeutic effects of current immunotherapies, suchas the blockade of immune checkpoints (for example anti-CTLA-4antibody), tumor-bearing mice were treated with intratumoral injectionof Heat-MVA in combination with intraperitoneal delivery of anti-CTLA-4antibody. Briefly, we implanted B16-F10 melanoma cells (2×10⁵)intradermally into the right flank of WT C57B/6 mice. Ten days followingtumor implantation, when the tumors have grown larger than those inExample 7, 10 or 11, mice were treated with the following combinations:PBS+isotype control, PBS+anti-CTLA-4 antibody, Heat-MVA+isotype control,and Heat-MVA+anti-CTLA-4. As shown in FIG. 11E, tumor volume wasconsistent among tested groups at the start of the virus injections.Mice treated with PBS+isotype control, or with PBS+anti-CTLA-4 diedquickly due to tumor growth (FIG. 13A, B). However, following theHeat-MVA treatment, tumors that received Heat-MVA injection weresignificantly reduced or eradicated, with 30% of mice free of tumors atthe end of the experiment (day 73 post virus injection) (FIG. 13C).Treatment with Heat-MVA and anti-CTLA-4 antibody led to superiortherapeutic efficacy compared to Heat-MVA treatment alone, with 78% ofmice free of tumors at the end of the experiment (FIG. 13D). We observedthe synergistic effects of intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA andintraperitoneal delivery of anti-CTLA-4 antibody, which lead to thedramatic increase in cure rates and survival (FIG. 13F, *, P<0.05; **,P<0.01; ****, P<0.0001). These results indicate that intratumoraldelivery of Heat-MVA leads to the alteration of tumor immune suppressivemicroenvironment with the generation of antitumor CD8⁺ and CD4⁺ T cellresponses, which are enhanced or unleashed in the presence ofanti-CTLA-4 antibody.

Example 14 Heat MVA is a Stronger Inducer of Antitumor Immunity than MVA

MVA is an attenuated vaccinia virus that is non-replicative in mostmammalian cells. We found that MVA modestly replicates in B16 melanomacells (FIG. 12A). Heat-MVA has reduced infectivity by 1000-fold and doesnot replicate in B16 melanoma cells (data not shown). We hypothesizedthat Heat-MVA might be a stronger activator of antitumor immunity thanMVA, given that Heat-MVA induces higher levels of type I IFN than MVA ininfected cDCs and tumor cells in vitro (Examples 1 and 5) as well as invivo (Example 4). We performed the following experiment to directlycompare the efficacies of tumor eradication and the generation ofsystemic immunity between intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA vs. MVA ina bilateral B16-F10 melanoma implantation model. Briefly, B16-F10melanoma cells were implanted intradermally to the left and right flanksof C57B/6 mice (5×10⁵ to the right flank and 1×10⁵ to the left flank). 8days after tumor implantation, we intratumorally inject 2×10⁷ pfu of MVAor an equivalent amount of Heat-MVA to the larger tumors on the rightflank. The tumor sizes were measured and the tumors were injected twicea week. Mouse survival was monitored as well. We found that in micetreated with PBS, tumors grow rapidly at the right flank, which resultedin early death (FIG. 12C, D and B). Intratumoral injection of eitherHeat-MVA or MVA resulted in delaying of tumor growth and improvedsurvival compared with PBS (FIG. 14B, ***, P<0.001 for MVA vs. PBS,****, P<0.0001 for Heat-MVA vs. PBS). Intratumoral injection of Heat-MVAis more efficacious than MVA in eradicating injected tumors (9/9 tumorfree for Heat-MVA vs. 6/9 tumor free for MVA) and delaying or inhibitingthe growth of non-injected tumors at the contralateral side (5/9 tumorfree for Heat-MVA vs. 1/9 tumor free for MVA) (FIG. 14E-H). We observedimproved survival in Heat-MVA-treated mice compared with MVA-treatedmice (FIG. 14B, **, P<0.01). These results indicate that (i) viralreplication is not necessary for achieving antitumor effects; and (ii)antitumor effects of Heat-MVA correlate with its ability to stronglyinduce Type I IFN.

Example 15 Heat MVA Induces More Immune Activating Cells in Non-InjectedTumors than MVA

To understand the immune mechanisms underlying the superiority ofHeat-MVA over MVA in the induction of systemic antitumor immunity, weinvestigated the immune cell infiltrates in the non-injected tumors inHeat-MVA or MVA-treated mice. Briefly, we intradermally implanted2.5×10⁵ B16-F10 melanoma cells to the left flank and 5×10⁵ B16-F10melanoma cells to the right flank of the mice. 7 days post implantation,we injected 2×10⁷ pfu of MVA, or an equivalent amount of Heat-MVA, orPBS into the larger tumors on the right flank. The injection wasrepeated three days later. The non-injected tumors were harvested andcell suspensions were generated. The live immune cell infiltrates in thetumors were analyzed by FACS. We observed a dramatic increase of CD45⁺,CD103⁺, CD3⁺ and CD8⁺ immune cells in the non-injected tumors of micetreated with Heat-MVA compared with those in mice treated with MVA orPBS. Although MVA-treatment also resulted in the increase of theseimmune cells in the non-injected tumors compared with those inPBS-treated mice, MVA is less potent than Heat-MVA in the induction ofimmune cells in the non-injected tumors (FIG. 15A). Heat-MVA-treatmentresulted in the recruitment and proliferation of cytotoxic Granzyme Bexpressing CD8⁺ and CD4⁺ T cells in the non-injected tumors (FIG. 15B).MVA is less potent than Heat-MVA in inducing Granzyme B⁺CD8⁺ in thenon-injected tumors (FIG. 15B). These results indicate that Heat-MVA ismore capable than MVA in the recruitment and activation of a variety ofimmune cells, especially with Granzyme B⁺CD8⁺ T cells, in thenon-injected tumors. This correlates with its enhanced efficacy ineradicating or delaying the growth of non-injected tumors andprolongation of survival compared with MVA.

Example 16 Intratumoral Delivery of Heat-MVA Fails to Cure B16-F 10Melanoma in a Bilateral Tumor Implantation Model in STING orBatf3-Deficient Mice

In example 10, we showed that intratumoral delivery of Heat-MVA isineffective in eradicating B16-F10 melanoma in a unilateral implantationmodel. To further extend this study, we tested the efficacy ofintratumoral delivery of Heat-MVA in a bilateral tumor implantationmodel. In PBS-treated group, all of the mice died with a median survivalof 16 days due to rapid growth of the larger tumors on the right flank(FIG. 16 A, B, I). Intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA leads toeradication of all of the injected tumors, but only cleared thenon-injected tumors in 3 out of 10 WT mice (FIG. 16 C, D, I, ****,P<0.0001 for Heat-MVA vs. PBS). We found that althoughHeat-MVA-treatment leads to 30% cure of melanoma in WT mice, it failedto have therapeutic benefits in Batf3 KO mice (FIG. 16 G, H, I). InSTING-deficient mice, intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA led to thedelay of tumor growth and extension of median survival (FIG. 16 E, F, I,** , P<0.01). Together with example 10, we conclude that Batf3-dependentCD103⁺ DCs are critical for the induction of antitumor immunity byintratumoral delivery of Heat-MVA. The cytosolic DNA-sensing pathwaymediated by STING also plays an important role in Heat-MVA-inducedadaptive antitumor immunity.

Example 17 Batf3 KO Mice are Deficient in Developing Antitumor CD8⁺ andCD4⁺ T Cells in Response to Intratumoral Delivery of Heat MVA

Given the importance of CD103⁺ DCs in Heat-MVA-induced antitumorimmunity shown in Example 10 and 16, and the critical role of CD8⁺ andCD4⁺ T cells in Heat-MVA-mediated antitumor effects, we investigatedwhether there is a deficiency in the generation of antitumor CD4⁺ andCD8⁺ T cells in Batf3 KO mice in response to intratumoral injection ofHeat-MVA using a bilateral tumor implantation model. Briefly, weintradermally implanted 2.5×10⁵ B16-F10 melanoma cells to the left flankand 5×10⁵ B16-F10 melanoma cells to the right flank of Batf3^(−/−) miceand WT age-matched controls. 7 days post implantation, we injectedeither Heat-MVA or PBS into the larger tumors on the right flank. Theinjection was repeated three days later. The non-injected tumors wereharvested on day 7 after first injection, and cell suspensions weregenerated. The live immune cell infiltrates in the injected andnon-injected tumors were analyzed by FACS. Similar to Example 15, weobserved a dramatic increase of CD3⁺ and CD8⁺ immune cells in bothinjected and non-injected tumors of mice treated with Heat-MVA comparedwith those in mice treated with PBS (FIG. 17 A-B, **,P<0.01;***,P<0.001). We also observed a significant increase of Ki-67⁺CD8⁺ andKi-67⁺CD4⁺ T cells in both injected and non-injected tumors (FIG. 17C-D, **, P<0.01; ***, P<0.001; ****, P<0.0001). By contrast, in Batf3 KOmice, the recruitment and proliferation of CD8⁺ and CD4⁺ T cells to theinjected and non-injected tumors was diminished (FIG. 17A-D). Theseresults indicate that CD103⁺ DCs are crucial in cross-presenting tumorantigens and generating antitumor CD8⁺ T cells in response to Heat-MVAtreatment. Many cell type other than CD103⁺ DCs are capable ofpresenting tumor antigen on MEW Class II to naïve CD4⁺ T cells. Here wefound that the number of tumor-reactive CD4⁺ T cells in the non-injectedtumors was much lower in Batf3^(−/−) mice than in WT mice (FIG. 17D). Itis possible that the lack of CD8⁺ T cells in the tumors in theBatf3^(−/−) mice leads to defective tumor killing and poor release oftumor antigen, which affects the generation of tumor-reactive CD4⁺ Tcells. Together with Example 10, 12 and 16, we conclude thatBatf3-dependent CD103⁺/CD8α DCs play important roles in Heat-MVA-inducedantitumor effects, including the generation of tumor-reactive CD8⁺, CD4⁺T cells, as well as anti-tumor antibodies.

Example 18 The Combination of Intratumoral Injection of Heat MVA withIntraperitoneal Delivery of Immune Checkpoint Blockade Leads toSynergistic Therapeutic Effects in a Bilateral Melanoma ImplantationModel

We then investigated whether intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA enhancestherapeutic effects of immune checkpoint blockade therapy such asanti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, or anti-PD-L1 antibodies in a bilateral B16-F10melanoma model, which simulates an individual with metastatic disease.Briefly, B16-F10 melanoma cells were implanted intradermally to the leftand right flanks of C57B/6 mice (5×10⁵ to the right flank and 1×10⁵ tothe left flank). 8 days after tumor implantation, we intratumorallyinjected Heat-MVA (heat-inactivated 2×10⁷ pfu of MVA) or PBS to thelarger tumors on the right flank twice weekly. Four groups of mice weretreated with Heat-MVA, with each group receiving intraperitonealdelivery of either isotype control, or anti-CTLA-4, or anti-PD-1, oranti-PD-L1 antibodies (FIG. 18A).

Whereas the PBS-treated mice died quickly with increasing tumor growthover the next 20 days (FIG. 18B, C, D), the mice treated withHeat-MVA+isotype control eradicated the injected tumors and delayed thegrowth of non-injected tumors at the contralateral side (FIG. 18E, F).As a result, treatment with Heat-MVA+isotype significantly extended thesurvival compared with PBS group (FIG. 18B, ****, P<0.0001). Thecombination of intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA and systemic deliveryof anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1 and anti-PD-L1 antibodies further delayed oreliminated the non-injected tumors. As a result, 50% of mice treatedwith Heat-MVA+anti-CTLA-4, 50% of mice treated Heat-MVA+anti-PD-1 and70% of mice treated with Heat-MVA+anti-PD-L1 were tumor free at the endof the experiment (day 57 post virus injection) compared with 10% oftumor-free mice treated with Heat-MVA+isotype (FIG. 18E-L).

The ability to control the growth of non-injected distant tumorscorrelated with the improved survival in the combination group withHeat-MVA+immune checkpoint blockade compared with Heat-MVA+isotypecontrol (FIG. 18B, **, P<0.0001). Intraperitoneal delivery ofanti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, or anti-PD-L1 alone has minimum therapeuticbenefits in the B16-F10 melanoma model (FIG. 13B and data not shown).These results indicate that intratumoral delivery of Heat-MVA overcomestreatment resistance to immune checkpoint blockade in a metastatic B16melanoma model which portends well for transferring this approach tohuman therapy with beneficial results.

This experiment will be repeated to assess the longer term benefit ofconjoint immune checkpoint blockade and inactivated MVA therapy.

Example 19 UV-MVA Induces Type I Interferon in cDCs in a STING-DependentManner

We hypothesized that ultraviolet light inactivation of MVA may alsoresult in an immune activating virus through activation of theSTING-mediated cytosolic DNA-sensing pathway. To test this hypothesis,we infected cDCs from STING^(Gt/Gt) and their age-matched WT controlmice. Cells (1×10⁶) were infected with MVA at a MOI of 10, or anequivalent amount of Heat-MVA, or UV-MVA. Supernatants were collected at22 h post infection, and the concentrations of secreted IFN-α and IFN-βwere determined by ELISA. Similar to Heat-MVA, UV-inactivated MVA alsoinduces higher levels of type I IFN than MVA in WT cDCs (FIG. 19A, B).UV-MVA-induced type I IFN is completely abolished in STING-deficientcells (FIG. 19A, B, ***, p<0.001). These results indicate that bothHeat-MVA and UV-MVA-mediated induction of IFN-α and IFN-β is dependenton the STING pathway, further corroborating that Heat-MVA and UV-MVAexert their tumor suppressive effects via similar mechanisms.

Example 20 Intratumoral Injection of UV-MVA and Heat MVA Leads toEradication of Injected Tumors and Development of Systemic AntitumorImmunity in a Unilateral Colon Adenocarcinoma Model

Experimental studies disclosed in Example 7 and 14 showed thatintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA leads to tumor eradication andsystemic anti-tumoral immunity in a murine transplantable B16-F10melanoma model. To test whether Heat-MVA or UV-MVA is capable oferadicating other solid tumors, we tested the anti-tumor effects ofHeat-MVA or UV-MVA in a murine MC38 colon adenocarcinoma implantationmodel. Colon adenocarcinoma is representative of a solid tumor notrelated to melanoma but was otherwise an arbitrary choice. 5×10⁵ MC38colon carcinoma cells were intradermally implanted into the right flankof C57B/6 mice. Tumors were allowed to grow for 7 days, after whichHeat-MVA or UV-MVA (through either heat or UV-inactivation of 2×10⁷ pfuof MVA) or PBS control were intratumorally injected twice a week. Tumorswere measured twice a week and tumor volumes were calculated accordingthe following formula: l (length)×w (width)×h(height)/2. We found thatall of the mice treated with PBS died due to tumor growth (FIG. 20D, G).70% of Heat-MVA-treated mice and 71% of UV-MVA-treated mice survived atthe end of the experiment (around 60 days after virus injection) (FIG.20E, F). Therefore, intratumoral injection of Heat- or UV-MVAsignificantly prolonged the survival of the mice compared with PBScontrol (FIG. 20G, ****, p<0.0001).

To test whether survived mice have developed systemic antitumorimmunity, we challenged the mice with a lethal dose of MC38 cells(1×10⁵) at the contralateral side and monitored survival. We found thatwhereas all of the naïve mice developed tumors and died, 100% of theHeat- or UV-MVA-treated mice rejected tumor challenge (FIG. 20H). Wealso tested whether infection of MC38 cells with Heat-MVA or UV-MVAinduces higher levels of inflammatory cytokines and chemokines than MVA,we infected MC38 cells with MVA at a MOI of 10, or with an equivalentamount of Heat-MVA or UV-MVA. Supernatants were collected at 22 h postinfection. The concentrations of secreted IL-6, CCL4 and CCL5 in thesupernatants were measured by ELISA. We also found that Heat-MVA andUV-MVA induced higher levels of IL-6, CC14 and CCL5 from MC38 cells thanMVA (FIG. 20A, B, C). Collectively, results observed in Example 7, 14,and Example 20, demonstrate that Heat-MVA and UV-MVA are efficient inpromoting anti-tumor effects in various solid tumors and that thefindings described in this disclosure are not limited to melanoma butcan be extrapolated to other solid tumors of diverse origins.

Example 21 Combination of Intratumoral Injection of Heat MVA withIntraperitoneal Delivery of Immune Checkpoint Blockade Leads toSynergistic Therapeutic Effects in a Bilateral MC38 Colon AdenocarcinomaImplantation Model

We further investigated whether intratumoral injection of Heat-MVAenhances therapeutic effects of immune checkpoint blockade therapy suchas anti-CTLA-4, anti- or anti-PD-L1 antibodies in other bilateral tumorimplantation model, which simulates an individual with metastaticdisease. Briefly, MC38 colon adenocarcinoma cells were implantedintradermally to the left and right flanks of C57B/6 mice (5×10⁵ to theright flank and 1×10⁵ to the left flank). 8 days after tumorimplantation, we intratumorally inject Heat-MVA (heat-inactivated 2×10⁷pfu of MVA) or PBS to the larger tumors on the right flank twice weekly.There are three groups of mice that were treated with PBS, with eachgroup received intraperitoneal delivery of either PBS, or anti-CTLA-4,or anti-PD-L1 antibodies (FIG. 21A-F). There are three groups of micethat were treated with Heat-MVA, with each group receivedintraperitoneal delivery of either isotype control, or anti-CTLA-4, oranti-PD-L1 antibodies (FIG. 21G-L). PBS-treated mice died quickly withincreasing tumor growth over the next 14 days (FIG. 21B, C, D), all ofthe mice treated with PBS+anti-CTLA-4, or PBS+anti-PD-L1, died althoughintraperitoneal injection of immune checkpoint blockade leads toprolonged survival compared with PBS group (FIG. 21A-F, M, ***,p<0.001). Similar to what we observed in the B16-F10 bilateralimplantation model (see example 14), intratumoral injection of Heat-MVAleads to eradication of injected MC38 tumors (FIG. 21G, 8/10 tumorfree), however, it delayed the growth of contralateral non-injectedtumors but only eradicated 1/10 of them (FIG. 21H, ****, p<0.0001Heat-MVA vs. PBS). By contrast, the combination of intratumoral deliveryof Heat-MVA with intraperitoneal delivery of anti-CTLA-4 antibody orHeat-MVA+anti-PD-L 1 lead to eradication of non-injected distant tumorsat a much higher efficiency than Heat-MVA alone (FIG. 21G-L), whichcorrelated with improved survival with the combination therapy comparedwith Heat-MVA alone (FIG. 21N, *, p<0.05, **, p<0.01). These resultshave implications for treatment of metastatic solid tumors using acombination of inactivated MVA and immune checkpoint blockade.

Example 22 Combination of Intratumoral Injection of Heat-WA withIntratumoral Delivery of Immune Checkpoint Blockade Anti-CTLA-4 AntibodyLeads to Synergistic Therapeutic Effects in a Bilateral B16-F10Implantation Model

In Examples 13, 18, and 21, we showed that the combination ofintratumoral injection of Heat-MVA with systemic (intraperitoneal)delivery of immune checkpoint blockade led to synergistic antitumoreffects in both melanoma and colon adenocarcinoma models. Here we testwhether the co-administration of Heat-MVA and anti-CTLA-4 antibody (at1/10 of dose used for intraperitoneal delivery) would achieve antitumoreffects in a stringent bilateral tumor implantation model. Briefly,B16-F10 melanoma cells were implanted intradermally to the left andright flanks of C57B/6 mice (5×10⁵ to the right flank and 1×10⁵ to theleft flank). 8 days after tumor implantation, we intratumorally injectedHeat-MVA (heat-inactivated 2×10⁷ pfu of MVA) or PBS to the larger tumorson the right flank twice weekly. Three groups of mice were treated withHeat-MVA, with each group receiving: (i) intraperitoneal delivery ofanti-CTLA-4 (100 μg/mouse) (ii) intratumoral delivery of isotypeantibody (10 μg/mouse), or (iii) intratumoral delivery of anti-CTLA-4antibody (10 μg/mouse) (FIG. 22). All of the PBS-treated mice died earlydue to the rapid growth of the injected and non-injected tumors (FIG.22A-B). Intratumoral co-injection of Heat-MVA and isotype antibodyeradicated 7 out of 10 injected tumors, but only cleared 1 out of 10non-injected tumors (FIG. 22C-D). By contrast, intratumoral co-injectionof Heat-MVA and anti-CTLA-4 antibody (10 μg/mouse) eradicated 10 out of10 injected tumors, and cleared 7 out of 10 non-injected tumors (FIG.22E-F), which is comparable to the therapeutic effects of thecombination of intratumoral injection of Heat-MVA and intraperitonealdelivery of anti-CTLA-4 antibody (100 μg/mouse) (FIG. 22G-H). Theseresults indicate that co-administration of Heat-MVA and an immunecheckpoint blockade, anti-CTLA-4 antibody, at a much lower dose canachieve similar systemic antitumor effects to the combination ofintratumoral delivery of Heat-MVA with systemic delivery of anti-CTLA-4antibody at a higher dose. This innovative approach has severaladvantages: (i) this provides “in situ therapeutic vaccine” through theactivation of innate immunity via the STING-dependent cytosolicDNA-sensing mechanism and the activation of adaptive immunity via theBatf3-dependent CD103⁺/CD8α cross-presenting DCs; (ii) this allowsrobust activation of CDS⁺ and CD4⁺ cytotoxic T cells in the presence ofanti-CTLA-4 antibody; (iii) this combination results in furtherdepletion of CD4⁺ regulatory T cells; (iv) this results in massive tumorkilling via the action of CDS⁺ and CD4⁺ cytotoxic T cells, release oftumor antigens, and optimal generation of anti-tumor adaptive immunity,including anti-tumor antibodies; and (v) this approach also lower thesystemic toxicity of anti-CTLA-4 antibody by delivering intratumorallyat one tenth of the dosage used in a intraperitoneal delivery.

Given that the combination of anti-CTLA-4 and anti-PD-1 antibodies ismore efficacious than either agent alone in PD-L1-negative tumors in aphase III clinical trials (Larkin et al., 2015), the inventors willdeliver combined inactivated MVA and both anti-CTLA-4 andanti-PD-1/anti-PD-L1 (the blocking agents typically delivered at lowerdoses than monotherapy and lower doses than conjoint administration bydifferent routes (intratumoral v. intravenous for example) will bedelivered intratumorally. It is anticipated that this will result inadditional augmentation of antitumor immunity and further improvedsurvival with lower incidence of side effects. In addition, morerecently developed immune checkpoint blockade antibodies will beincluded in such conjoint delivery such as anti-LAG-3, anti-TIM-3, andanti-TIGIT antibodies fin or the treatment of various solid tumors inpre-clinical models such as those described above.

The foregoing Examples are illustrative of the methods and featuresdescribed herein and are not intended to be limiting. Moreover, theycontain statements of general applicability to the present disclosureand such statements are not confined to the particular Example theyappear in but constitute conclusions descriptions and expressions ofbroader implications of the experimental results described herein.

The contents of all cited references are incorporated by reference intheir entirety as if fully transcribed herein for all purposes.

REFERENCES

-   1. Jochems, C. and J. Schlom. (2011). Tumor-infiltrating immune    cells and prognosis: the potential link between conventional cancer    therapy and immunity. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 236(5): 567-579.-   2. Mlecnik, B., G. Bindea, F. Pages, and J. Galon. (2011). Tumor    immunosurveillance in human cancers. Cancer Metastasis Rev 30(1):    5-12.-   3. Angell, H. and J. Galon. (2013). From the immune contexture to    the Immunoscore: the role of prognostic and predictive immune    markers in cancer. Curr Opin Immunol 25(2): 261-267.-   4. Fuertes, M. B., S. R. Woo, B. Burnett, Y. X. Fu, and T. F.    Gajewski. (2013). Type I interferon response and innate immune    sensing of cancer. Trends Immunol 34(2): 67-73.-   5. Fuertes, M. B., A. K. Kacha, J. Kline, S. R. Woo, D. M.    Kranz, K. M. Murphy, and T. F. Gajewski. (2011). Host type I IFN    signals are required for antitumor CD8+ T cell responses through    CD8{alpha}+ dendritic cells. J Exp Med 208(10): 2005-2016.-   6. Diamond, M. S., M. Kinder, H. Matsushita, M. Mashayekhi, G. P.    Dunn, J. M. Archambault, H. Lee, C. D. Arthur, J. M. White, U.    Kalinke, K. M. Murphy, and R. D. Schreiber. (2011). Type I    interferon is selectively required by dendritic cells for immune    rejection of tumors. J Exp Med 208(10): 1989-2003.-   7. Woo, S. R., M. B. Fuertes, L. Corrales, S. Spranger, M. J.    Furdyna, M. Y. Leung, R. Duggan, Y. Wang, G. N. Barber, K. A.    Fitzgerald, M. L. Alegre, and T. F. Gajewski. (2014).    STING-dependent cytosolic DNA sensing mediates innate immune    recognition of immunogenic tumors. Immunity 41(5): 830-842.-   8. Deng, L., H. Liang, M. Xu, X. Yang, B. Burnette, A. Arina, X. D.    Li, H. Mauceri, M. Beckett, T. Darga, X. Huang, T. F.    Gajewski, Z. J. Chen, Y. X. Fu, and R. R. Weichselbaum. (2014).    STING-Dependent Cytosolic DNA Sensing Promotes Radiation-Induced    Type I Interferon-Dependent Antitumor Immunity in Immunogenic    Tumors. Immunity 41(5): 843-852.-   9. Oble, D. A., R. Loewe, P. Yu, and M. C. Mihm, Jr. (2009). Focus    on TILs: prognostic significance of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes    in human melanoma. Cancer Immun 9: 3.-   10. Lacy, K. E., S. N. Karagiannis, and F. O. Nestle. (2012).    Immunotherapy for Melanoma. Expert Rev Dermatol 7(1): 51-68.-   11. Sharma, P. and J.P. Allison. (2015). The future of immune    checkpoint therapy. Science 348(6230): 56-61.-   12. Hodi, F. S., S. J. O'Day, D. F. McDermott, R. W. Weber, J. A.    Sosman, J. B. Haanen, R. Gonzalez, C. Robert, D. Schadendorf, J. C.    Hassel, W. Akerley, A. J. van den Eertwegh, J. Lutzky, P.    Lorigan, J. M. Vaubel, G. P. Linette, D. Hogg, C. H. Ottensmeier, C.    Lebbe, C. Peschel, I. Quirt, J. I. Clark, J. D. Wolchok, J. S.    Weber, J. Tian, et al. (2010). Improved survival with ipilimumab in    patients with metastatic melanoma. N Engl J Med 363(8): 711-723.-   13. Wolchok, J. D., B. Neyns, G. Linette, S. Negrier, J. Lutzky, L.    Thomas, W. Waterfield, D. Schadendorf, M. Smylie, T. Guthrie,    Jr., J. J. Grob, J. Chesney, K. Chin, K. Chen, A. Hoos, S. J. O'Day,    and C. Lebbe. (2010). Ipilimumab monotherapy in patients with    pretreated advanced melanoma: a randomised, double-blind,    multicentre, phase 2, dose-ranging study. Lancet Oncol 11(2):    155-164.-   14. Topalian, S. L., F. S. Hodi, J. R. Brahmer, S. N.    Gettinger, D. C. Smith, D. F. McDermott, J. D. Powderly, R. D.    Carvajal, J. A. Sosman, M. B. Atkins, P. D. Leming, D. R.    Spigel, S. J. Antonia, L. Horn, C. G. Drake, D. M. Pardoll, L.    Chen, W. H. Sharfman, R. A. Anders, J. M. Taube, T. L. McMiller, H.    Xu, A. J. Korman, M. Jure-Kunkel, S. Agrawal, et al. (2012). Safety,    activity, and immune correlates of anti-PD-1 antibody in cancer. N    Engl J Med 366(26): 2443-2454.-   15. Wolchok, J. D., H. Kluger, M. K. Callahan, M. A. Postow, N. A.    Rizvi, A. M. Lesokhin, N. H. Segal, C. E. Ariyan, R. A. Gordon, K.    Reed, M. M. Burke, A. Caldwell, S. A. Kronenberg, B. U.    Agunwamba, X. Zhang, I. Lowy, H. D. Inzunza, W. Feely, C. E.    Horak, Q. Hong, A. J. Korman, J. M. Wigginton, A. Gupta, and M.    Sznol. (2013). Nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced melanoma. N    Engl J Med 369(2): 122-133.-   16. Hamid, O., C. Robert, A. Daud, F. S. Hodi, W. J. Hwu, R.    Kefford, J. D. Wolchok, P. Hersey, R. W. Joseph, J. S. Weber, R.    Dronca, T. C. Gangadhar, A. Patnaik, H. Zarour, A. M. Joshua, K.    Gergich, J. Elassaiss-Schaap, A. Algazi, C. Mateus, P.    Boasberg, P. C. Tumeh, B. Chmielowski, S. W. Ebbinghaus, X. N.    Li, S. P. Kang, et al. (2013). Safety and Tumor Responses with    Lambrolizumab (Anti-PD-1) in Melanoma. N Engl J Med.-   17. Tumeh, P. C., C. L. Harview, J. H. Yearley, I. P.    Shintaku, E. J. Taylor, L. Robert, B. Chmielowski, M. Spasic, G.    Henry, V. Ciobanu, A. N. West, M. Carmona, C. Kivork, E. Seja, G.    Cherry, A. J. Gutierrez, T. R. Grogan, C. Mateus, G. Tomasic, J. A.    Glaspy, R. O. Emerson, H. Robins, R. H. Pierce, D. A. Elashoff, C.    Robert, et al. (2014). PD-1 blockade induces responses by inhibiting    adaptive immune resistance. Nature 515(7528): 568-571.-   18. Zamarin, D., R. B. Holmgaard, S. K. Subudhi, J. S. Park, M.    Mansour, P. Palese, T. Merghoub, J. D. Wolchok, and J. P. Allison.    (2014). Localized oncolytic virotherapy overcomes systemic tumor    resistance to immune checkpoint blockade immunotherapy. Sci Transl    Med 6(226): 226ra232.-   19. Kirn, D. H. and S. H. Thorne. (2009). Targeted and armed    oncolytic poxviruses: a novel multi-mechanistic therapeutic class    for cancer. Nat Rev Cancer 9(1): 64-71.-   20. Moss, B., Poxviridae: The viruses and their replication. In    Fields Virology, ed. e. D. M. Knipe 2007: Lippincott Williams &    Wilkins. pp. 2905-2946.-   21. Breitbach, C. J., S. H. Thorne, J. C. Bell, and D. H. Kirn.    (2012). Targeted and armed oncolytic poxviruses for cancer: the lead    example of JX-594. Curr Pharm Biotechnol 13(9): 1768-1772.-   22. Park, B. H., T. Hwang, T. C. Liu, D. Y. Sze, J. S. Kim, H. C.    Kwon, S. Y. Oh, S. Y. Han, J. H. Yoon, S. H. Hong, A. Moon, K.    Speth, C. Park, Y. J. Ahn, M. Daneshmand, B. G. Rhee, H. M.    Pinedo, J. C. Bell, and D. H. Kirn. (2008). Use of a targeted    oncolytic poxvirus, JX-594, in patients with refractory primary or    metastatic liver cancer: a phase I trial. Lancet Oncol 9(6):    533-542.-   23. Kirn, D. H., Y. Wang, F. Le Boeuf, J. Bell, and S. H. Thorne.    (2007). Targeting of interferon-beta to produce a specific,    multi-mechanistic oncolytic vaccinia virus. PLoS Med 4(12): e353.-   24. Thorne, S. H., T. H. Hwang, W. E. O'Gorman, D. L. Bartlett, S.    Sei, F. Kanji, C. Brown, J. Werier, J. H. Cho, D. E. Lee, Y.    Wang, J. Bell, and D. H. Kirn. (2007). Rational strain selection and    engineering creates a broad-spectrum, systemically effective    oncolytic poxvirus, JX-963. J Clin Invest 117(11): 3350-3358.-   25. Engelmayer, J., M. Larsson, M. Subklewe, A. Chahroudi, W. I.    Cox, R. M. Steinman, and N. Bhardwaj. (1999). Vaccinia virus    inhibits the maturation of human dendritic cells: a novel mechanism    of immune evasion. J Immunol 163(12): 6762-6768.-   26. Jenne, L., C. Hauser, J. F. Arrighi, J. H. Saurat, and A. W.    Hugin. (2000). Poxvirus as a vector to transduce human dendritic    cells for immunotherapy: abortive infection but reduced APC    function. Gene Ther 7(18): 1575-1583.-   27. Deng, L., P. Dai, W. Ding, R. D. Granstein, and S. Shuman.    (2006). Vaccinia virus infection attenuates innate immune responses    and antigen presentation by epidermal dendritic cells. J Virol    80(20): 9977-9987.-   28. Li, P., N. Wang, D. Zhou, C. S. Yee, C. H. Chang, R. R.    Brutkiewicz, and J. S. Blum. (2005). Disruption of MHC class    II-restricted antigen presentation by vaccinia virus. J Immunol    175(10): 6481-6488.-   29. Seet, B. T., J. B. Johnston, C. R. Brunetti, J. W. Barrett, H.    Everett, C. Cameron, J. Sypula, S. H. Nazarian, A. Lucas, and G.    McFadden. (2003). Poxviruses and immune evasion. Annu Rev Immunol    21: 377-423.-   30. Meyer, H., G. Sutter, and A. Mayr. (1991). Mapping of deletions    in the genome of the highly attenuated vaccinia virus MVA and their    influence on virulence. J Gen Virol 72 (Pt 5): 1031-1038.-   31. McCurdy, L. H., B. D. Larkin, J. E. Martin, and B. S. Graham.    (2004). Modified vaccinia Ankara: potential as an alternative    smallpox vaccine. Clin Infect Dis 38(12): 1749-1753.-   32. Vollmar, J., N. Arndtz, K. M. Eckl, T. Thomsen, B. Petzold, L.    Mateo, B. Schlereth, A. Handley, L. King, V. Hulsemann, M.    Tzatzaris, K. Merkl, N. Wulff, and P. Chaplin. (2006). Safety and    immunogenicity of IMVAMUNE, a promising candidate as a third    generation smallpox vaccine. Vaccine 24(12): 2065-2070.-   33. Sutter, G. and C. Staib. (2003). Vaccinia vectors as candidate    vaccines: the development of modified vaccinia virus Ankara for    antigen delivery. Curr Drug Targets Infect Disord 3(3): 263-271.-   34. Gomez, C. E., J. L. Najera, M. Krupa, and M. Esteban. (2008).    The poxvirus vectors MVA and NYVAC as gene delivery systems for    vaccination against infectious diseases and cancer. Curr Gene Ther    8(2): 97-120.-   35. Gomez, C. E., J. L. Najera, M. Krupa, B. Perdiguero, and M.    Esteban. (2011). MVA and NYVAC as vaccines against emergent    infectious diseases and cancer. Curr Gene Ther 11(3): 189-217.-   36. Goepfert, P. A., M. L. Elizaga, A. Sato, L. Qin, M.    Cardinali, C. M. Hay, J. Hural, S. C. DeRosa, O. D. DeFawe, G. D.    Tomaras, D. C. Montefiori, Y. Xu, L. Lai, S. A. Kalams, L. R.    Baden, S. E. Frey, W. A. Blattner, L. S. Wyatt, B. Moss, and H. L.    Robinson. (2011). Phase 1 safety and immunogenicity testing of DNA    and recombinant modified vaccinia Ankara vaccines expressing HIV-1    virus-like particles. J Infect Dis 203(5): 610-619.-   37. Wyatt, L. S., I. M. Belyakov, P. L. Earl, J. A. Berzofsky,    and B. Moss. (2008). Enhanced cell surface expression,    immunogenicity and genetic stability resulting from a spontaneous    truncation of HIV Env expressed by a recombinant MVA. Virology    372(2): 260-272.-   38. Garcia, F., J. C. Bernaldo de Quiros, C. E. Gomez, B.    Perdiguero, J. L. Najera, V. Jimenez, J. Garcia-Arriaza, A. C.    Guardo, I. Perez, V. Diaz-Brito, M. S. Conde, N. Gonzalez, A.    Alvarez, J. Alcami, J. L. Jimenez, J. Pich, J. A. Arnaiz, M. J.    Maleno, A. Leon, M. A. Munoz-Fernandez, P. Liljestrom, J. Weber, G.    Pantaleo, J. M. Gatell, M. Plana, et al. (2011). Safety and    immunogenicity of a modified pox vector-based HIV/AIDS vaccine    candidate expressing Env, Gag, Pol and Nef proteins of HIV-1 subtype    B (MVA-B) in healthy HIV-1-uninfected volunteers: A phase I clinical    trial (RISVACO2). Vaccine 29(46): 8309-8316.-   39. Bowie, A., E. Kiss-Toth, J. A. Symons, G. L. Smith, S. K. Dower,    and L. A. O'Neill. (2000). A46R and A52R from vaccinia virus are    antagonists of host IL-1 and toll-like receptor signaling. Proc Natl    Acad Sci USA 97(18): 10162-10167.-   40. Harte, M. T., I. R. Haga, G. Maloney, P. Gray, P. C.    Reading, N. W. Bartlett, G. L. Smith, A. Bowie, and L. A. O'Neill.    (2003). The poxvirus protein A52R targets Toll-like receptor    signaling complexes to suppress host defense. J Exp Med 197(3):    343-351.-   41. DiPerna, G., J. Stack, A. G. Bowie, A. Boyd, G. Kotwal, Z.    Zhang, S. Arvikar, E. Latz, K. A. Fitzgerald, and W. L. Marshall.    (2004). Poxvirus protein N1L targets the 1-kappaB kinase complex,    inhibits signaling to NF-kappaB by the tumor necrosis factor    superfamily of receptors, and inhibits NF-kappaB and IRF3 signaling    by toll-like receptors. J Biol Chem 279(35): 36570-36578.-   42. Graham, S. C., M. W. Bahar, S. Cooray, R. A. Chen, D. M.    Whalen, N. G. Abrescia, D. Alderton, R. J. Owens, D. I.    Stuart, G. L. Smith, and J. M. Grimes. (2008). Vaccinia virus    proteins A52 and B14 Share a Bc1-2-like fold but have evolved to    inhibit NF-kappaB rather than apoptosis. PLoS Pathog 4(8): e1000128.-   43. Lynch, H. E., C. A. Ray, K. L. Oie, J. J. Pollara, I. T.    Petty, A. J. Sadler, B. R. Williams, and D. J. Pickup. (2009).    Modified vaccinia virus Ankara can activate NF-kappaB transcription    factors through a double-stranded RNA-activated protein kinase    (PKR)-dependent pathway during the early phase of virus replication.    Virology 391(2): 177-186.-   44. Willis, K. L., S. Patel, Y. Xiang, and J. L. Shisler. (2009).    The effect of the vaccinia K1 protein on the PKR-elF2alpha pathway    in RK13 and HeLa cells. Virology 394(1): 73-81.-   45. Kotwal, G. J., A. W. Hugin, and B. Moss. (1989). Mapping and    insertional mutagenesis of a vaccinia virus gene encoding a    13,800-Da secreted protein. Virology 171(2): 579-587.-   46. Bartlett, N., J. A. Symons, D. C. Tscharke, and G. L. Smith.    (2002). The vaccinia virus N1L protein is an intracellular homodimer    that promotes virulence. J Gen Virol 83(Pt 8): 1965-1976.-   47. Brandt, T., M. C. Heck, S. Vijaysri, G. M. Jentarra, J. M.    Cameron, and B. L. Jacobs. (2005). The N-terminal domain of the    vaccinia virus E3L-protein is required for neurovirulence, but not    induction of a protective immune response. Virology 333(2): 263-270.-   48. Chang, H. W., J. C. Watson, and B. L. Jacobs. (1992). The E3L    gene of vaccinia virus encodes an inhibitor of the    interferon-induced, double-stranded RNA-dependent protein kinase.    Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89(11): 4825-4829.-   49. Xiang, Y., R. C. Condit, S. Vijaysri, B. Jacobs, B. R. Williams,    and R. H. Silverman. (2002). Blockade of interferon induction and    action by the E3L double-stranded RNA binding proteins of vaccinia    virus. J Virol 76(10): 5251-5259.-   50. Beattie, E., E. B. Kauffman, H. Martinez, M. E. Perkus, B. L.    Jacobs, E. Paoletti, and J. Tartaglia. (1996). Host-range    restriction of vaccinia virus E3L-specific deletion mutants. Virus    Genes 12(1): 89-94.-   51. Brandt, T. A. and B. L. Jacobs. (2001). Both carboxy- and    amino-terminal domains of the vaccinia virus interferon resistance    gene, E3L, are required for pathogenesis in a mouse model. J Virol    75(2): 850-856.-   52. Langland, J. O., J. C. Kash, V. Carter, M. J. Thomas, M. G.    Katze, and B. L. Jacobs. (2006). Suppression of proinflammatory    signal transduction and gene expression by the dual nucleic acid    binding domains of the vaccinia virus E3L proteins. J Virol 80(20):    10083-10095.-   53. Smith, E. J., I. Marie, A. Prakash, A. Garcia-Sastre, and D. E.    Levy. (2001). IRF3 and IRF7 phosphorylation in virus-infected cells    does not require double-stranded RNA-dependent protein kinase R or    lkappa B kinase but is blocked by Vaccinia virus E3L protein. J Biol    Chem 276(12): 8951-8957.-   54. Guerra, S., A. Caceres, K. P. Knobeloch, I. Horak, and M.    Esteban. (2008). Vaccinia virus E3 protein prevents the antiviral    action of ISG15. PLoS Pathog 4(7): e1000096.-   55. Deng, L., P. Dai, T. Parikh, H. Cao, V. Bhoj, Q. Sun, Z.    Chen, T. Merghoub, A. Houghton, and S. Shuman. (2008). Vaccinia    virus subverts a mitochondrial antiviral signaling protein-dependent    innate immune response in keratinocytes through its double-stranded    RNA binding protein, E3. J Virol 82(21): 10735-10746.-   56. Drillien, R., D. Spehner, and D. Hanau. (2004). Modified    vaccinia virus Ankara induces moderate activation of human dendritic    cells. J Gen Virol 85(Pt 8): 2167-2175.-   57. Waibler, Z., M. Anzaghe, H. Ludwig, S. Akira, S. Weiss, G.    Sutter, and U. Kalinke. (2007). Modified vaccinia virus Ankara    induces Toll-like receptor-independent type I interferon responses.    J Virol 81(22): 12102-12110.-   58. Delaloye, J., T. Roger, Q. G. Steiner-Tardivel, D. Le Roy, M.    Knaup Reymond, S. Akira, V. Petrilli, C. E. Gomez, B. Perdiguero, J.    Tschopp, G. Pantaleo, M. Esteban, and T. Calandra. (2009). Innate    immune sensing of modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) is mediated    by TLR2-TLR6, MDA-5 and the NALP3 inflammasome. PLoS Pathog 5(6):    e1000480.-   59. Ishikawa, H. and G. N. Barber. (2008). STING is an endoplasmic    reticulum adaptor that facilitates innate immune signalling. Nature    455(7213): 674-678.-   60. Zhong, B., Y. Yang, S. Li, Y. Y. Wang, Y. Li, F. Diao, C.    Lei, X. He, L. Zhang, P. Tien, and H. B. Shu. (2008). The adaptor    protein MITA links virus-sensing receptors to IRF3 transcription    factor activation. Immunity 29(4): 538-550.-   61. Ishikawa, H., Z. Ma, and G. N. Barber. (2009). STING regulates    intracellular DNA-mediated, type I interferon-dependent innate    immunity. Nature 461(7265): 788-792.-   62. Wu, J., L. Sun, X. Chen, F. Du, H. Shi, C. Chen, and Z. J. Chen.    (2013). Cyclic GMP-AMP is an endogenous second messenger in innate    immune signaling by cytosolic DNA. Science 339(6121): 826-830.-   63. Sun, L., J. Wu, F. Du, X. Chen, and Z. J. Chen. (2013). Cyclic    GMP-AMP synthase is a cytosolic DNA sensor that activates the type I    interferon pathway. Science 339(6121): 786-791.-   64. Gao, P., M. Ascano, Y. Wu, W. Barchet, B. L. Gaffney, T.    Zillinger, A. A. Serganov, Y. Liu, R. A. Jones, G. Hartmann, T.    Tuschl, and D. J. Patel. (2013). Cyclic [G(2′,5′)pA(3′,5′)p] is the    metazoan second messenger produced by DNA-activated cyclic GMP-AMP    synthase. Cell 153(5): 1094-1107.-   65. Civril, F., T. Deimling, C. C. de Oliveira Mann, A. Ablasser, M.    Moldt, G. Witte, V. Hornung, and K. P. Hopfner. (2013). Structural    mechanism of cytosolic DNA sensing by cGAS. Nature 498(7454):    332-337.-   66. Ablasser, A., M. Goldeck, T. Caviar, T. Deimling, G. Witte, I.    Rohl, K. P. Hopfner, J. Ludwig, and V. Hornung. (2013). cGAS    produces a 2′-5′-linked cyclic dinucleotide second messenger that    activates STING. Nature 498(7454): 380-384.-   67. Li, X., C. Shu, G. Yi, C. T. Chaton, C. L. Shelton, J. Diao, X.    Zuo, C. C. Kao, A. B. Herr, and P. Li. (2013). Cyclic GMP-AMP    synthase is activated by double-stranded DNA-induced    oligomerization. Immunity 39(6): 1019-1031.-   68. Zhang, X., H. Shi, J. Wu, X. Zhang, L. Sun, C. Chen, and Z. J.    Chen. (2013). Cyclic GMP-AMP containing mixed phosphodiester    linkages is an endogenous high-affinity ligand for STING. Mol Cell    51(2): 226-235.-   69. Gao, P., M. Ascano, T. Zillinger, W. Wang, P. Dai, A. A.    Serganov, B. L. Gaffney, S. Shuman, R. A. Jones, L. Deng, G.    Hartmann, W. Barchet, T. Tuschl, and D. J. Patel. (2013).    Structure-function analysis of STING activation by    c[G(2′,5′)pA(3′,5′)p] and targeting by antiviral DMXAA. Cell 154(4):    748-762.-   70. Dai, P., W. Wang, H. Cao, F. Avogadri, L. Dai, I. Drexler, J. A.    Joyce, X. D. Li, Z. Chen, T. Merghoub, S. Shuman, and L. Deng.    (2014). Modified vaccinia virus Ankara triggers type I IFN    production in murine conventional dendritic cells via a    cGAS/STING-mediated cytosolic DNA-sensing pathway. PLoS Pathog    10(4): e1003989.-   71. Huber, J. P. and J. D. Farrar. (2011). Regulation of effector    and memory T-cell functions by type I interferon. Immunology 132(4):    466-474.-   72. Pardoll, D. M. (2012). The blockade of immune checkpoints in    cancer immunotherapy. Nat Rev Cancer 12(4): 252-264.-   73. Nemunaitis, J. (1999). Oncolytic viruses. Invest New Drugs    17(4): 375-386.-   74. Kirn, D., R. L. Martuza, and J. Zwiebel. (2001).    Replication-selective virotherapy for cancer: Biological principles,    risk management and future directions. Nat Med 7(7): 781-787.-   75. Coffey, M. C., J. E. Strong, P. A. Forsyth, and P. W. Lee.    (1998). Reovirus therapy of tumors with activated Ras pathway.    Science 282(5392): 1332-1334.-   76. Mayr, A., H. Stickl, H. K. Muller, K. Danner, and H. Singer.    (1978). [The smallpox vaccination strain MVA: marker, genetic    structure, experience gained with the parenteral vaccination and    behavior in organisms with a debilitated defence mechanism (author's    transl)]. Zentralbl Bakteriol B 167(5-6): 375-390.-   77. Verheust, C., M. Goossens, K. Pauwels, and D. Breyer. (2012).    Biosafety aspects of modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA)-based    vectors used for gene therapy or vaccination. Vaccine 30(16):    2623-2632.-   78. Antoine, G., F. Scheiflinger, F. Dorner, and F. G. Falkner.    (1998). The complete genomic sequence of the modified vaccinia    Ankara strain: comparison with other orthopoxviruses. Virology    244(2): 365-396.-   79. Tsung, K., J. H. Yim, W. Marti, R. M. Buller, and J. A. Norton.    (1996). Gene expression and cytopathic effect of vaccinia virus    inactivated by psoralen and long-wave UV light. J Virol 70(1):    165-171.-   80. Mayr, A., Hochstein-Mintzel V, Stickl H. (1975). Passage    history, properties, and applicability of the attenuated vaccinia    virus strain MVA [in German]. Infection 3: 6-14.-   81. Brandler, S., A. Lepelley, M. Desdouits, F.    Guivel-Benhassine, P. E. Ceccaldi, Y. Levy, O. Schwartz, and A.    Moris. (2010). Preclinical studies of a modified vaccinia virus    Ankara-based HIV candidate vaccine: antigen presentation and    antiviral effect. J Virol 84(10): 5314-5328.-   82. Takaoka, A. and T. Taniguchi. (2003). New aspects of    IFN-alpha/beta signalling in immunity, oncogenesis and bone    metabolism. Cancer Sci 94(5): 405-411.-   83. Nagorsen, D., E. Wang, F. M. Marincola, and J. Even. (2002).    Transcriptional analysis of tumor-specific T-cell responses in    cancer patients. Crit Rev Immunol 22(5-6): 449-462.-   84. Pramanick, S., Singodia, D., and Chandel, V. (2013). Excipient    selection in parenteral formulation development. Pharma Times 45(3):    65-77.-   85. Weaver, J. R., M. Shamim, E. Alexander, D. H. Davies, P. L.    Feigner, and S. N. Isaacs. (2007). The identification and    characterization of a monoclonal antibody to the vaccinia virus E3    protein. Virus Res 130(1-2): 269-274.-   86. Li, X. D., J. Wu, D. Gao, H. Wang, L. Sun, and Z. J. Chen.    (2013). Pivotal roles of cGAS-cGAMP signaling in antiviral defense    and immune adjuvant effects. Science 341(6152): 1390-1394.-   87. Tanaka, Y. and Z. J. Chen. (2012). STING specifies IRF3    phosphorylation by TBK1 in the cytosolic DNA signaling pathway. Sci    Signal 5(214): ra20.-   88. Xiao, T. S. and K. A. Fitzgerald. (2013). The cGAS-STING pathway    for DNA sensing. Mol Cell 51(2): 135-139.-   89. Sauer, J. D., K. Sotelo-Troha, J. von Moltke, K. M.    Monroe, C. S. Rae, S. W. Brubaker, M. Hyodo, Y. Hayakawa, J. J.    Woodward, D. A. Portnoy, and R. E. Vance. (2011). The    N-ethyl-N-nitrosourea-induced Goldenticket mouse mutant reveals an    essential function of Sting in the in vivo interferon response to    Listeria monocytogenes and cyclic dinucleotides. Infect Immun 79(2):    688-694.-   90. Corrales, L., L. H. Glickman, S. M. McWhirter, D. B.    Kanne, K. E. Sivick, G. E. Katibah, S. R. Woo, E. Lemmens, T.    Banda, J. J. Leong, K. Metchette, T. W. Dubensky, Jr., and T. F.    Gajewski. (2015). Direct Activation of STING in the Tumor    Microenvironment Leads to Potent and Systemic Tumor Regression and    Immunity. Cell Rep 11(7): 1018-1030.-   91. Hildner, K., B. T. Edelson, W. E. Purtha, M. Diamond, H.    Matsushita, M. Kohyama, B. Calderon, B. U. Schraml, E. R.    Unanue, M. S. Diamond, R. D. Schreiber, T. L. Murphy, and K. M.    Murphy. (2008). Batf3 deficiency reveals a critical role for    CD8alpha+ dendritic cells in cytotoxic T cell immunity. Science    322(5904): 1097-1100.-   92. Edelson, B. T., W. Kc, R. Juang, M. Kohyama, L. A. Benoit, P. A.    Klekotka, C. Moon, J. C. Albring, W. Ise, D. G. Michael, D.    Bhattacharya, T. S. Stappenbeck, M. J. Holtzman, S. S. Sung, T. L.    Murphy, K. Hildner, and K. M. Murphy. (2010). Peripheral CD103+    dendritic cells form a unified subset developmentally related to    CD8alpha+ conventional dendritic cells. J Exp Med 207(4): 823-836.

1.-60. (canceled)
 61. A method for treating a solid malignant tumor in asubject in need thereof, the method comprising delivering to tumor cellsof the subject a therapeutically effective amount of inactivatedmodified vaccinia Ankara (inactivated MVA) virus, thereby resulting intreatment of the tumor, wherein the tumor is a carcinoma.
 62. The methodof claim 61, wherein the treatment comprises one or more of thefollowing: inducing the immune system of the subject to mount an immuneresponse against the tumor; reducing the size of the tumor; eradicatingthe tumor; inhibiting growth of the tumor; inhibiting metastasis of thetumor; reducing or eradicating metastatic tumor; inducing apoptosis ofthe tumor cells; and prolonging survival of the subject as compared toan untreated control subject.
 63. The method of claim 61, wherein thetumor includes tumor located at the site of inactivated MVA delivery, ortumor located both at the site and elsewhere in the body of the subject.64. The method of claim 61, wherein the inactivated MVA does notcomprise a heterologous nucleic acid encoding or expressing a tumorantigen.
 65. The method of claim 61, further comprising conjointlyadministering to the subject a therapeutically effective amount of animmune checkpoint blocking agent.
 66. The method of claim 65, whereinthe inactivated MVA is delivered parenterally, intratumorally,intravenously, and/or intraperitoneally to the subject, and wherein theimmune checkpoint blocking agent is administered parenterally,intratumorally, intravenously, and/or intraperitoneally to the subject.67. The method of claim 65, wherein the immune checkpoint blocking agentmodulates the activity of one or more checkpoint proteins selected fromthe group consisting of: CTLA-4, CD80, CD86, PD-1, PD-L1, PD-L2, TIGIT,LAG3, B7-H3, B7-H4, TIM3, ICOS, BTLA, and CD28.
 68. The method of claim65, wherein the inactivated MVA is delivered to the subject separately,sequentially, or simultaneously with the immune checkpoint blockingagent.
 69. The method of claim 65, wherein one or both of theinactivated MVA and the immune checkpoint blocking agent arerespectively delivered and administered during a period of time ofseveral weeks, months, or years, or indefinitely as long as benefitspersist or a maximum tolerated dose is reached.
 70. The method of claim65, wherein the inactivated MVA is delivered at a dosage peradministration of about 10⁵ to about 10¹⁰ plaque-forming units (pfu).71. The method of claim 65, wherein the combination of the inactivatedMVA and the immune checkpoint blocking agent has a synergistic effect inthe treatment of the tumor, wherein the immune checkpoint blocking agentis selected from an anti-CTLA-4 antibody, an anti-PD-1 antibody, or ananti-PD-L1 antibody.
 72. The method of claim 61, wherein the inactivatedMVA is heat-inactivated MVA or UV-inactivated MVA.
 73. A method ofeliciting an immune response comprising delivering to biological cells atherapeutically effective amount of an inactivated modified vacciniaAnkara (inactivated MVA) virus, thereby inducing at least one or more ofthe following: increasing at least one of cytotoxic CD8⁺ T cells andeffector CD4⁺ T cells; inducing maturation of dendritic cells throughinduction of type I IFN; reducing immune suppressive (regulatory) CD4⁺ Tcells; and inducing type I IFN, inflammatory cytokine and chemokineproduction in immune cells and stromal fibroblasts as compared tountreated control cells.
 74. The method of claim 73, wherein theinactivated MVA delivered to the cells is effective to recruit andactivate CD4⁺ effector T cells accompanied by a reduction of regulatoryCD4⁺ T cells.
 75. The method of claim 73, wherein the inactivated MVA isdelivered parenterally, intratumorally, intravenously, orintraperitoneally.
 76. The method of claim 73, wherein the inactivatedMVA is delivered at a dosage per administration of about 10⁵ to about10¹⁰ plaque-forming units (pfu).
 77. The method of claim 73, wherein thedelivery is repeated with a frequency within the range from once permonth to once per week or more, and continues for several weeks, months,years, or indefinitely until a maximum tolerated dose is reached. 78.The method of claim 73, wherein the inactivated MVA induces type Iinterferon (type I IFN) in infected cells and/or activates type I IFNgene expression by inducing higher levels of IFNA4 and IFNB mRNA and/orincreasing phospho-IRF3 compared to MVA.
 79. The method of claim 73,wherein delivery of inactivated MVA induces higher levels of productionof at least one of IFN-β, IL-6, CCL4, and CCL5, and/or higher levels ofgene expression of IFN-β, IL-6, CCL4, and CCL5 than MVA.
 80. The methodof claim 73, wherein the inactivated MVA is heat-inactivated MVA orUV-inactivated MVA.